Kerala High Court
Joby K.B vs Smt. C.A.Latha on 15 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 24TH ASHADHA, 1943
CON.CASE(C) NO. 167 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP(KAT) 13/2020 OF HIGH COURT OF
KERALA
PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN THE ABOVE OP(KAT):
JOBY K.B.,
AGED 43 YEARS,
S/O.K.V.BABY, FORMERLY WORKING AS OFFICE ASSISTANT,
OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES (BRACKISH WATER
AND TRAINING ), EAST KADUNGALLOOR, U.C.COLLEGE P.O.,
RESIDING AT KODIVELIPURATH HOUSE, MUDAVOOR P.O.,
MUVATTUPUZHA-686 669,
AND NOW WORKING AS MECHANIC O/O DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES, KANHANGAD, KASARGODE DISTRICT-PIN-673 315.
BY ADVS.
SMT.GIRIJA K GOPAL
SMT.K.N.VIGY
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT NO.2 IN THE ABOVE OP(KAT):
SMT. C.A.LATHA,
AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
WORKING AS THE DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES, VIKAS BHAVAN,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.
BY ADV. SRI.T.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR, SENIOR GOVERNMENT
PLEADER
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 15.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CON.CASE(C) NO. 167 OF 2021
2
JUDGMENT
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
The respondent State has complied with the
directions in the judgment as seen from Annexures R1(b) and
R1(c).
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner however
submits that the petitioner still has a claim in so far as he has
not been considered for promotion, when the vacancy arose.
The respondents kept the consideration in abeyance, till his
senior was qualified. As on the date of arising the vacancy,
the petitioner's contention is that, if consideration had been
made, his senior, then was unqualified and he would have got
the promotion. These are matters, which are alien to the
present application.
In such circumstances, we leave the petitioner
to agitate his cause before the appropriate forum. We make
it clear that liberty granted need not be deemed as a finding
of this Court that there is a valid grievance, which would have
CON.CASE(C) NO. 167 OF 2021
to be considered by the forum, the petitioner approaches.
With such liberty, we close the contempt case.
Sd/-
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE.
Sd/-
P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, JUDGE.
ww
CON.CASE(C) NO. 167 OF 2021
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:
ANNEXURE A1 A CERTIFIED COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED
20.2.2020 IN OP(KAT) NO.294/2019 AND
OP(KAT) NO.13/2020.
ANNEXURE A2 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
19.12.2019 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT
IN OP(KAT) 294/2019.
ANNEXURE A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A4/11019/2017
DATED 7.1.2020 ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES.
ANNEXURE A4 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED
04.2018 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES, KASARGODE TO THE PETITIONER.
ANNEXURE A5 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
12.3.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE DIRECTOR OF FISHERIES.
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:
ANNEXURE R1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A4/11019/2017
DATED 31.03.2021.
ANNEXURE R1(B) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13.04.2021.
ANNEXURE R1(C) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03.05.2021.
ANNEXURE R1(D) REPORT OF THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF
FISHERIES, KANNUR.
ANNEXURE R1(E) TRUE COPY OF THE CHART SHOWING THE
SENIORITY OF MACHANIC CADRE.
ANNEXURE R1(F) TRUE COPY OF THE TREATMENT CERTIFICATE.
