Pradeep Kumar G vs Institute Of Management In ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 15295 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
     THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JULY 2021 / 31ST ASHADHA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 12854 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          PRADEEP KUMAR G.
          AGED 42 YEARS
          S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, PRESENTLY WORKING AS PEON
          GRADE-II (DAILY WAGE) INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT IN
          GOVERNMENT, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
          RESIDING AT GOPALA KRISHNA MANDIRAM, POOZHIKUNNU,
          INDUSTRIAL ESTATE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

          BY ADVS.
          SHAMEENA SALAHUDHEEN
          R.SHABANA



RESPONDENTS:

    1     INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT IN GOVERNMENT
          VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001,
          REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR GENERAL.

    2     THE DIRECTOR GENERAL
          INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT IN GOVERNMENT, VIKAS BHAVAN
          P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

    3     THE SECRETARY
          INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT IN GOVERNMENT, VIKAS BHAVAN
          P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.




          SMT.LATHA ANAND     SC

          SRI. SUNIL KUMAR KURIAKOSE - GP




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 12854 OF 2021
                                              2

                                     JUDGMENT

This is a matter in which, though the petitioner does not

have any legal locus to plead that he should be allowed to

continue in service, he requests to relying on Ext.P8 proceedings,

whereby, various similarly placed others have been given the said

benefit.

2. Noticing the afore, as also the submissions of

Smt.Shameena Salahudheen - learned counsel for the petitioner, I

had, on the 1st of July 2021, passed the following order:

"Smt.Latha Anand - learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents, argued that the petitioner has no legal locus to seek that he be allowed to continue in service, because he has worked for less than 10 years. She, however, added that the petitioner appears to have made a representation before the competent respondent, pending this lis; and that, therefore, her clients are willing to consider the same as per law.

2. I, however, record the submissions of Smt.Shameena Salahudheen, that five other persons, who are mentioned in Ext.P8, have been working on various designations akin to the petitioner for the last more than WP(C) NO. 12854 OF 2021

several years, and therefore that her client's case be also considered along with that of theirs.

I, therefore, adjourn this matter to be called on 21.07.2021; within which time, the competent respondent is at liberty to consider the representation now made by the petitioner.

The interim order dated 28.06.2021 will stand extended until the next posting date."

3. When this matter was called today, Smt.Latha Anand -

learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, submitted that

petitioner's representation has been considered and that he has been

given posting in a different Project for a period of three months.

This submission has been affirmed by Smt.Shameena Salahudheen,

who, however, prayed that this Court passed affirmative orders in

this writ petition, since her client now apprehends that he will be

sent out of service after the above period of three months.

4. Though the above apprehension of the petitioner may be

genuine, the fact remains that respondents have now appointed him

in a fresh Project for a period of three months. Obviously, his WP(C) NO. 12854 OF 2021

position for the said period is now safe.

I am, therefore, of the firm view that nothing remains in

this writ petition and that this Court will be justified in closing it;

however, with a direction to the respondents to consider

continuance of the petitioner, after the aforementioned period of

three months, to an appropriate post, if possible, in the same

Project, or as a Peon in the 1st respondent, since the petitioner

asserts that there are vacancies available; and it is made clear that

this shall be done before his termination of the present posting

happens.

Needless to say, if no decision is taken in terms of the afore

directions, the petitioner will be allowed to continue until such

time as a decision to that effect is taken and the resultant order

communicated to him.

At this time, Smt.Latha Anand submitted that towards the

end of the present term, petitioner may be directed to make a

representation for the afore purpose. Smt.Shameena Salahudeen WP(C) NO. 12854 OF 2021

- learned counsel for the petitioner acceded to this.

Therefore, it is ordered that, on the petitioner making a

representation before his present term ends, the same shall be

considered in terms of my directions as above.

This writ petition is thus disposed of.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE SAS/22/07/2021 WP(C) NO. 12854 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12854/2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 19.07.2012.

Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT IN GOVERNMENT, SERVICE RULES.

Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN W.P(C)NO.26421/2018 DATED 30.08.2018.

Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER NO.2909/A1/2018/IMG DATED 14.06.2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN WP(C)NO.33874/2019 DATED 16.12.2019.

Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.1683/A1/2019/IMG DATED 30.12.2019.

Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE MERCY PETITION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.2774/A1/2020/IMG DATED 27.10.2020 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF G.O(MS)NO.10/2017/P&ARD DATED 30.03.2017.

Exhibit P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 25.06.2021.

Exhibit P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATIONS.