IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2010 / 12TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 16941 of 2010(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V.K.SHEEJA, SPECIAL VILLAGE OFFICER PALAKKAD III VILLAGE OFFICE, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.N.SUGATHAN SMT.VARSHA BHASKAR SRI.S.PRASANTH (AYYAPPANKAVU) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDINGS,THIRUVANNTHAPURAM 695 033. 2. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDINGS, THIRUVANNTHAPURAM 695 033. BY G.P.SRI.ARAVINDKUMAR BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.16941 of 2010 (P) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 2nd day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T Ext.P4 is the provisional seniority list of UDC/SVO for the period from 01/11/1998 to 30/06/2004. The petitioner complains that despite her entitlement to be included in the provisional seniority list, her name was not included. It is stated that although, she has filed Ext.P5 objections seeking inclusion in Ext.P4, orders have not been passed thereon. It is stated that while the matter is pending as above, as per Ext.P6, promotions are being effected on the basis of Ext.P4. It is stated that she claimed promotion by filing Ext.P8 before the 1st respondent and Ext.P8 is also not considered. It is in these circumstances this writ petition has been filed. 2. Going by the submissions made the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is evident that the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the higher post was allegedly overlooked for the reason that her name was not included in Ext.P4 provisional seniority list. Therefore, at the first instance what is required is that WP(C) No.16941/2010 -2- Ext.P5 filed by he petitioner before the 2nd respondent should be considered and if the claim of the petitioner is found to be of substance, necessary modifications to Ext.P4 will have to be made. Therefore, I direct the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P5 and pass orders thereon as above. This the 2nd respondent shall do as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. 3. It is further directed that depending upon the outcome of Ext.P5, the petitioner's claim for promotion urged by Ext.P8 filed before the 1st respondent also should be taken up and considered without any further delay. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of this writ petition, and supplementary representations before respondents 1 & 2 for compliance. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg