Kerala High Court
D.Chandra Mohan vs The Kerala State Electricity ... on 1 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 12TH MAGHA,1942
WP(C).No.25322 OF 2011
PETITIONER:
D.CHANDRA MOHAN
ASSISTANT ENGINEER
T.C.M.S., ELECTRICAL CIRCLE,
KSEB KOLLAM,
RESIDING AT SAROVARAM,
PADANAYAR KULANGARA NORTH,
KARUNAGAPPALLY.
BY ADVS.
SRI.A.N.RAJAN BABU
SRI.A.R.EASWAR LAL
SRI.P.GOPALAKRISHNAN (MVA)
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD (KSEB),
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001
2 THE CHIEF ENGINEER
KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD (KSEB),
VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001
3 K.CHANDRA BABU
ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION, AYOOR-691533
R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.K.THANKAPPAN, SC, KERALA STATE
ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMIT
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
01.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.25322 OF 2011 2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court
with a plea that respondents 1 and 2 be
directed to promote as Assistant Executive
Engineer, based on his appointment as
Assistant Engineer on 16/09/1996, in
preference to those who are below him in the
category of Sub Engineer.
2. Sri.M.K.Thankappan, the learned
Standing Counsel for the Kerala State
Electricity Board (KSEB for short), submitted
that even though the petitioner was promoted
in the year 1999, he is seeking an earlier
date based on the assertion that he is Senior
to many others in the seniority list. He also
submitted that the petitioner belongs to the
10% category of graduate engineers in the
services of KSEB and therefore, that he cannot
seek any promotion in excess of the quota
prescribed in the relevant Rules and
regulations. He then added that, since the
petitioner has now retired from service, he
cannot seek any further relief; but that, if
this Court is so inclined, the KSEB is willing
to consider any representation that the
petitioner may make with respect to this, if
he needs any further relief.
3. When I consider the afore submissions,
it is ineluctable that the petitioner is no
longer in service, since at the time when this
Writ Petition was filed in the year 2011, he
was 53 years in age. Obviously, therefore,
all that he can now aspire for is a change in
his retiral benefits, if he so interested.
In the afore circumstances, I order this
Writ Petition to the limited extent of leaving
liberty to the petitioner to approach the
competent Authority of the KSEB, with an
appropriate representation, if he is so
desirous; and if this is done within a period
of one month from the date of receipt of a
copy of this judgment, the said Authority will
consider the same, after affording him an
opportunity of being heard - either physically
or through video conferencing - thus
culminating in an appropriate order thereon,
as per law.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
MC/3.2.2021
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN O.P NO.3291/1992
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SENIORITY LIST OF
ASSISTANT ENGINEER OF 10% DEGREE HOLDERS
W.E.F 23.11.1983
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED
18.10.07 TO 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED
18.10.07
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.EB GRADE 3/WPC
NO.4504/2010/09-10 DATED 4.3.2010, BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6.6.2007 BY
AN INTERIM ORDER IN WP(C) NO.22687/06.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF LIST
OF ASSISTANT ENGINEER (ELE) AS PER
SENIORITY IN THE FEEDER CATEGORY AND WHO
WERE APPOINTED ON 16.3.1996 UNDER 10%
DEGREE QUOTA.
