Koshy Isaac Panicker vs The Kerala State Electricity ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 6425 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
  TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 23RD JYAISHTA, 1945
                     WP(C) NO. 16702 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

          KOSHY ISAAC PANICKER
          AGED 54 YEARS
          ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL),
          EMPLOYEE CODE 1045699,
          LOAD DESPATCH STATION,
          KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMITED,
          KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM - 682021.

          BY ADV JOSE J.MATHAIKAL


RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMITED,
          VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695004
          REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND
          MANAGING DIRECTOR

    2     THE CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM)
          THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOAD LIMITED,
          VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695004.


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 13.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.16702 of 2023
                                    2




                            JUDGMENT

Dated this the 13th day of June, 2023

The petitioner is an Assistant Executive Engineer in the

Kerala State Electricity Board Limited, now working at

Kalamassery. His place of domicile is at Kaloor, Ernakulam. From

11.01.2018 to 08.12.2022, the petitioner worked at Moolamattom

and from that place he was transferred to Kalamassery on

09.12.2022.

2. As per Transfer guidelines of KSEBL which was in

force in 2021 and 2022, on completion of three years in a station

other than the domicile station, the said station will be treated as

Deemed Domicile and the officer will not be entitled to count the

distance from his domicile to that station for the purpose of

calculating Index mark. The said guidelines clarified that this W.P.(C) No.16702 of 2023

principle of deemed domicile is not applicable to officers who are

working in Idukki District. Moolamattom is a place in Idukki District

and hence the said principle of Deemed Domicile was not

applicable to the petitioner during the period 2021 and 2022.

3. However, ignoring the said exemption granted to

officers working in Idukki district, the 2 nd respondent recalculated

the Index marks of the petitioner treating the distance from Kaloor

in Ernakulam District to Moolamattam as just 8 Kilometers with

retrospective effect from 2021 and published Ext.P1 Index marks

of petitioner as just 48075 instead of the eligible 96000 marks and

above.

4. This illegality was sought to be corrected by the

petitioner by filing Exhibits P3 and P4 petitions through proper

channel. But, without taking any decisions on those petitions, the

2nd respondent is now taking steps to publish the draft general

transfer list. If the draft transfer list is published based on the

above index mark allotted to the petitioner, there is every chance W.P.(C) No.16702 of 2023

for him to be transferred out of Kalamassery where he joined just

five months ago in a situation where the petitioner is due to retire

from service in April, 2025. The petitioner is entitled to continue at

Kalamassery till his retirement in April, 2025 in the light of clause

II(14) of the transfer guidelines, contends the petitioner.

5. Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf of the

respondents and resisted the writ petition. The Standing Counsel

denied all the allegations made by the petitioner in the writ

petition. However, on behalf of the respondents, it is submitted

that since the petitioner has preferred Exts.P3 and P4

representations before the 2nd respondent, the same can be

considered and a decision taken thereon in accordance with law

within a time frame.

6. Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has

raised his grievances before the 2nd respondent, I deem it

necessary that the 2nd respondent consider the grievance raised

by the petitioner, at least at the first instance. W.P.(C) No.16702 of 2023

In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing

the 2nd respondent-Chief Engineer to consider Exts.P3 and P4

representations submitted by the petitioner and take a decision

thereon, as early as possible and at any rate, before publishing

the draft transfer order.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH JUDGE ams W.P.(C) No.16702 of 2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16702/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PORTION OF DISTRICT WISE INDEX LIST OF ASSISTNAT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER(ELECTRICAL) Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PORTION OF SERVICE DETAILS OF THE PETITIONER Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 24/4/2023 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 9/5/2023 Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PORTION OF TRANSFER GUIDELINES 2023 Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PORTION OF TRANSFER GUIDELINES 2022 Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PORTION OF TRANSFER GUIDELINES 2021