IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 22ND MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 4546 of 2010(P) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- T.A. THAJUDEEN, BADGE NO.13039 SENIOR TECHNICIAN (THERMAL) MECHANICAL IN SUB LAYER, THERMAL PLANT-PD-FACT, UDYOGAMANGAL, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN SRI.T.R.SADEESAN SRI.A.HAROON RASHEED RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS TRAVANCORE LTD UDYOGAMANDAL,REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER (HR) FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS TRAVANCORE LTD UDYOGAMANDAL, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. SHRI K.B.SHIBU, BADGE NO.13040 SENIOR TECHNICIAN THERMAL MECHANICAL SUB LAYER THERMAL PLANT PD-FACT, UDYOGAMANDAL, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI. E.K. NANDAKUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 4546 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a Technician (Thermal)-Mechanical-cum -Apprentice under the first respondent. According to the petitioner, the inter se seniority between himself and the third respondent is reflected in Ext.P1 posting order. However, it was unsettled while publishing the seniority list in the cadre of Technician (Thermal) Mechanical and while effecting promotion to the managerial cadre. Raising grievance against the seniority list published in the cadre of Technician, the petitioner has already approached the second respondent through Ext.P2 representation. He has also submitted a similar representation representation before the first respondent as is evident from Ext.P4. His grievance is that on account of the wrong fixation of the seniority, he was denied his due promotion to the managerial post at the right time. It was raising all these grievances that the aforesaid representations were submitted before the respondents 1 and 2. 2. As noticed hereinbefore, indicating all the grievances in the aforesaid subject matter, the petitioner has already approached respondents W.P.(C) NO.4546 of 2010 2 1 and 2 through Exts.P2 and P4 representations. The said representations are still pending. Therefore, for enabling the first respondent to look into the said grievances, the second respondent shall forward Ext.P2 representation to the first respondent. In the event of receipt of the said representation, the first respondent shall consider Exts.P2 and P4 representations and pass orders thereon within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, with notice to the third respondent as well, in accordance with law. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.4546 of 2010 3 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. W.P.(C). NO. 4546/2010 JUDGMENT 11th February, 2010. W.P.(C) NO.4546 of 2010 4