IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2011 / 8TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 705 of 2011(K) ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. RADHAKRISHNAN.S., TOKEN NO.627, EOT CRANE OPERATOR, AUTOKAST LED., S.N.PURAM, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. SADANANDAN.K.V. TOKEN NO.597, FURNACE MAN, WORKING DO- 3. VIJAYAKUMAR.V., TOKEN NO.533, EOT CRANE OPERATOR, WORKING DO- 4. M.N.GANGADHARAN NAIR, TOKEN NO.611, FURNACE MAN WORKING DO- 5. SURESH MOHAN.B., TOKEN NO.704, EOT CRANE OPERATOR, WORKING DO- 6. N.PURUSHAN, TOKEN NO.791, FELTER, WORKING DO- 7. P.RAJENDRA PILLAI, TOKEN NO.606, GRINDER, WORKING DO- 8. K.E.JOHN, TOKEN NO.784, CORE MAKER, WORKING DO- 9. KRISHNAN.P. TOKEN NO.557, POURER, WORKING DO- 10. SUKUMARAN.N.C. TOKEN NO.790, CORE MAKER, WORKING DO- 11. N.SUNDARASANAN, TOKEN NO. 578, GRINDER,WORKING DO- 12. VINCENT FERNANDUS, TOKEN NO.596, CORE MAKER, WORKING DO- 13. OUSEPH.O., TOKEN NO.781, MOULDER, WORKING DO- 14. T.THULASEEDHARAN PILLAI, TOKEN NO.548, CORE MAKER, WORKING DO- 15. M.VASUDEVAN NAIR, TOKEN NO.795, FELTER, WORKING DO- 16. ABDUL AZEEZ.A. TOKEN NO.773, FURNACE MAN, WORKING DO- BY ADV. SRI.K.PRAVEEN KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. AUTOKAST LTD., REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, S.N.PURAM.P.O., CHERTHALA-688582. 3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, AUTOKAST LTD., S.N.PURAM.P.O., CHERTHALA-688582. 4. SREEKUMAR, TOKEN NO. 522, AUTOKAST LTD., S.N. PURAM P.O. CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DIST. 5. THULASEEDHARAN PILLAI, TOKEN NO. 617, 30. ADDL. RESPONDENTS 4 AND 5 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER IN I.A.NO.1436/2011. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. SANDESH RAJA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 705 of 2011 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 28th day of January, 2011. J U D G M E N T Petitioners are employees of the 2nd respondent Government Company who claim to be affected by the promotion policy of 1991. They have filed Ext. P4 before the 3rd respondent. For the present, they would be satisfied with a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider ad pass orders on Ext. P4 expeditiously . Having heard the learned standing counsel for respondents 2 and 3, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext. P4 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the 1st petitioner. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE.