IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1930 WA.No. 2149 of 2008() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.14174/2007 Dated 19/06/2008 .................... APPELLANT(S):/PETITIONERS -------------- 1. T.P.JAYADEVA SARMA, SENIOR INSTRUCTOR (HIGHER GRADE),I.T.I, CHENGANNOOR. 2. Y.THOMAS KUTTY, SENIOR INSTRUCTOR, I.T.I, KOLLAM. 3. K.JAYAKUMARLAN CHETTIAR, SENIOR INSTRUCTOR, SCDD ITC, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. B.ANITHA, SENIOR INSTRUCTOR, GOVT.I.T.I, CHANDANATHOPPU, KOLLAM. 5. L.MINI, SENIOR INSTRUCTOR, GOVERNMENT I.T.I, CHAKKA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.SUBASH CHANDRA BOSE RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP.BY SECRETARY, LABOUR AND REHABILITATION DEPT., SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DIRECTOR, EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING, INDUSTRIAL TRAINING DEPT, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. RAJI PAUL, GROUP INSTRUCTOR, I.T.I, KOZHIKODE. 4. C.RATHEESAN, GROUP INSTRUCTOR, TECHNICAL ASSISTANT, DIRECTORATE OF TRAINING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. WA NO.2149/2008 2 5. JOSE VARGHESE, SENIOR INSTRUCTOR, I.T.I, KOZHIKODE. 6. G.AJAYAKUMAR, SENIOR INSTRUCTOR, I.T.I, CHANDANATHOPE, KOLLAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SHRI BENNY GERVACIS THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JJ. -------------------------------------- W.A.No.2149 of 2008 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of November, 2008. JUDGMENT Koshy, J. Petitioners and respondents 3 to 6 are Senior Instructors in the Industrial Training Department. The case of the appellants is that the contesting respondents who are juniors to the appellants were promoted. But petitioners 1 and 2 acquired degree after the contesting respondents acquired degree. With regard to promotion, Note.1 to Rule 3 of the relevant Special Rules reads as follows:- “Note:1. Out of every nine vacancies for promotion, the fourth and the eighth shall be reserved for diploma holders and the 9th for a degree holder. A diploma/certificate holder who obtains the degree/diploma will be eligible for promotion in the quota allotted for degree/diploma holders treating him/her as the junior-most degree/diploma holder. The senior among such degree/diploma holders who obtained degree/diploma after entry in service will be determined with reference to the date on which the degree/diploma was obtained; provided that this will not affect the WA No.2149/2008 2 right of such certificate/diploma holders to get promotion under the normal rules of promotion.” Rule further says that once the candidates are in the feeder category the benefits of promotion as a degree holder can be availed by them depending upon the date of obtaining degree. Admittedly respondents obtained degree before the appellants/petitioners. According to the appellants Rule 6 is wrong.. The date of passing degree ought not to have been considered as all of them were working in the same post. But the rule making authority is of the view that experience after obtaining degree should be counted more weight. The above view cannot be termed as arbitrary and violative of the Constitution. Learned Single Judge after considering the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chandravathi v. Saji (2004(2) KLT 320) dismissed the Writ Petition. We agree with the views of the learned Single Judge. Writ Appeal therefore, is dismissed. J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE. cks