IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2008 / 18TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 24114 of 2007(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ P.KUTTAN,(STAFF NO.14135), DIVISIONAL ENGINEER(OFFICIATING), BHARATH SANCHAR NIGAM LTD., OFFICE OF THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER, CHITTUR, PALGHAT, KERALA CIRCLE. BY ADV. SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHAR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE BHARATH SANCHAR NIGAM LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, CORPORATE OFFICE, STATESMAN BUILDING, BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI-1. 2. THE DIRECTOR (HRD), BHARATH SANCHAR NIGAM LTD., CORPORATE OFFICE, STATESMAN BUILDING, BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI-1. 3. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, (PERSONNEL I), BHARATH SANCHAR NIGAM LTD., STATESMAN BUILDING, BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI-1. 4. THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, BHARATH SANCHAR NIGAM LTD., KERALA TELECOMMUNICATIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL, SC,BSNL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 24114 of 2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1- TRUE COPY OF THE RRELEVANT PAGES OF THE SAID SENIORITY LIST OF TELECOM OFFICERS ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATION, NEW DELHI. EXT.P2- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10.4.02 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATION GRANTING AD HOC PROMOTION TO SHRI BHASKARAN C.N. JUNIOR OF THE PETITIONER EXT.P3- TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 17.11.03 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATION GRANTING AD HOC PROMOTION TO THE PETITIONER EXT.P3(a)- TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 2.12.2003 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT GRANTING AD HOC PROMOTION TO THE PETITIONER EXT.-P4- TRUE COPY OF THE SAID PETITION DATED 30.12.2003 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATION, NEW DELHI EXT.P5- TRUE COPY OF THE SAID PETITION DATED 28.2.2004 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATION, NEW DELHI. EXT.P6- TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 7.7.2004 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR GENERAL (PERSONAL) BSNL, NEW DELHI EXT.P7- TRUE COPY OF PETITION DATED 18.7.06 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P8- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.5.06 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT EXT.P9- TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 23.7.07 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT EXT.P10- TRUE COPY OF the ORDER DATED 25.7.07 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT (TRUE COPY) P.A TO JUDGE V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).24114/2007 -------------------- Dated this the 8th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT By Ext.P3 order dated 17.11.2003, petitioner was promoted as Divisional Engineer. But for some inexplicable reasons, he was included for promotion along with several others in the Andhra Pradesh Circle and therefore order of promotion was not served on the petitioner. On realisation of the mistake and when it was found that his juniors were being promoted to the post of Divisional Engineer, he moved Ext.P4 representation on 30.12.2003 pointing out that he belongs to Kerala Circle but his posting is in Andhra Pradesh. He therefore, sought for a rectification of the order. Request was repeated in Exts.P5, P6 and P7. In the meanwhile, the petitioner's juniors were promoted and one of them, according to the petitioner, was even promoted further. It was at this juncture that the petitioner approached this Court. 2. In a statement filed by the respondents, the fact W.P.(C).24114/2007 2 that the petitioner's allotment to the AP Circle on promotion was a mistake is practically admitted. But it is also stated that the decision as to the manner in which the petitioner has to be promoted is to be taken by the Corporate Office. It is further stated that the Kerala Telecom Circle has recommended petitioner's promotion and the matter has been taken up with the Corporate Office. 3. After having heard the learned counsel on either side, writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to look into the petitioner's claim for promotion with reference to the date of Ext.P3 and take appropriate remedial action to see that the petitioner is given appropriate promotion in the appropriate Circle without further delay. Needful shall be done within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. To enable the first respondent to do so, petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a detailed representation pointing out these W.P.(C).24114/2007 3 aspects. First respondent shall also take appropriate decision as to the benefits due to the petitioner consequent upon the promotion in the manner aforementioned. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs