IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2009 / 3RD MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 38185 of 2008(U) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ R.V.GEORGE, SUB ENGINEER, K.S.E.B. CIVIL CIRCLE, KAKKAYAM, KAKKAYAM P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM), K.S.E.B. VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE CHAIRMAN, K.S.E.B., VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI. K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB FOR R1 TO R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.38185 of 2008-U - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2009. JUDGMENT The substantial relief sought for in the writ petition is for a direction to the respondents to implement Ext.P6 by which he has been ordered to be promoted to the cadre of Asst. Engineer (Civil) under the 20% quota. The same is dated 12.3.2008. 2. Heard learned Standing Counsel for the respondents also. 3. The petitioner is due to retire from service on 30.6.2009 on attaining the age of superannuation. The petitioner had suffered a suspension by Ext.P1 order and all those proceedings have been finalised. Ext.P6 order was issued after finalisation of the proceedings against him. The allegation substantially made is that there are no legal grounds to withheld the implementation of Ext.P6. He is also relying upon Ext.P8 judgment of this court in Writ Petition Nos.19924/2007 and 29579/2007 by which one Shri C.V. Davis, Executive Engineer, even though was ordered to be promoted could not get promotion because of the inaction on the part of the respondents and this court after overruling the objections raised by the respondents, directed that the right to get promotion under the WPC 38185/2008 2 order that was placed in the writ petition, cannot be refused. 4. As far as Sub Engineers are concerned, a similar issue arose for decision in Writ Petition No.35424/1005 wherein this court after elaborately considering the matter, upheld the right of promotion ordered under Rule 31 (a)(i) of KS & SSR. It was observed that mere pendency of disciplinary proceedings or the fact that disciplinary proceedings were taken, cannot be a good reason for withholding the promotion of a senior member of the feeder category who is fully qualified for the post. I respectfully follow the principles laid down in the judgment rendered by this court in Ext.P8. 5. Even though the matter stands posted for getting instructions, in the light of the fact that earlier this court had issued directions in similar circumstances, which is not disputed, this writ petition is allowed. There will be a direction to the respondents to see that the petitioner is given a posting in the promoted post as ordered in Ext.P6 within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/