IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 31ST MAY 2010 / 10TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 14024 of 2010(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MUHAMMED KOYA C.CHUNDAYIL, S/O.MOIDI, AGED 42 YEARS, LIBRARY ATTENDER, GOVERNMENT HOMEOPATHIC MEDICAL COLLEGE, KARAPARAMBA, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.E.HAMSA SRI.M.SAJJAD RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE PRINCIPAL & CONTROLLING OFFICER, GOVERNMENT HOMEOPATHIC MEDICAL COLLEGE, IRANIMUTTOM, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, GOVERNMENT HOMEOPATHIC MEDICAL COLLEGE, KARAPARAMBA, KOZHIKODE. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.DILIP MOHAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 14024 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is presently working as Library Attender in Government Homeopathic Medical College, Karaparamba in Kozhikode District. The grievance of the petitioner pertains to the non-consideration of his claim for promotion to the post of Pharmacist on the ground that the category of Library Attender is not included in the feeder category. Admittedly, the Library Attender is not included in the feeder category. The contention of the petitioner is that the qualification prescribed for the post of Pharmacist is the possession of Pharmacist Training Certificate. Ext.P1 would reveal that the petitioner possesses the said qualification. He is also working in the category of Library Attender. Essentially, the present grievance of the petitioner is one of under inclusiveness. In the context of the contentions of the petitioner, it is relevant to note the Division Bench decision of this court in W.A.No.2510/2008. The petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing W.P.(C). No.34789/2004 for a declaration that he is entitled to be promoted to the post of Pharmacist since he has passed Nursing -cum-Pharmacist course. W.P.(C) NO.14024/2010 2 The said claim of the petitioner was rejected by the learned Single Judge and the matter was taken in appeal as W.A.No.2510/2008. W.P.(C). No.34789/2004 was dismissed on the grounds that the post of Lab Attender is not included in the feeder category and three years experience as Attender/Attendant/Nursing Assistant/Store Keeper in hospital is mentioned as a qualification for promotion to the post of Pharmacist and, therefore, the petitioner did not satisfy the requisite qualification for promotion to the post of Pharmacist. While agreeing with the findings of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C).No.34789/2004, liberty was given to the petitioner to make a representation to include the post of Library Attender in the feeder category as per the judgment in W.A.No.2510/2008. In terms of the directions in the said Writ Appeal, the petitioner has submitted Exts.P2 and P3 representations before the first respondent. In the context of the contentions, it is also relevant to note that subsequent to the submission of the aforesaid representations by the petitioner, the second respondent as per Ext.P4 requested the first respondent to include Library Attenders having the qualification of NCP (Homeo) and working as Library Attenders in the department, in the feeder category of Pharmacist. According to the petitioner, in the light of the Division Bench W.P.(C) NO.14024/2010 3 judgment in W.A.No.2510/2008 and also the request made by the second respondent to the first respondent as per Ext.P4, the first respondent is bound to look into the question of under inclusiveness in the matter of promotion to the post of Pharmacist. 2. Obviously, while dismissing the Writ Appeal No.2510/2008 as per judgment dated 2.1.2009, this Court granted the petitioner a liberty to submit a representation to include the post of Library Attender in the feeder category. Indisputably, the said question as to whether the Library Attender is to be included in the feeder category for promotion to the post of Pharmacist is a matter which can only be looked into by the first respondent. As is evident from Ext.P4, the second respondent has also suggested for inclusion of the said category in the feeder category. Therefore, taking into the spirit of the judgment in W.A.No.2510/2008 as also the recommendation made by the second respondent as per Ext.P4, the first respondent is bound to consider the request made by the petitioner. In view of the said peculiar circumstances, there will be a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P2 and P3 representations submitted by the petitioner in the light of Ext.P4 and the judgment in W.P.(C) NO.14024/2010 4 W.A.No.2510/2008 expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. This Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.14024/2010 5 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. W.P.(C). NO. 14024/2010 JUDGMENT 31st May, 2010 W.P.(C) NO.14024/2010 6