Monday, 04, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

C.Muthukumar vs The Cochin Port Trust
2024 Latest Caselaw 30366 Ker

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 30366 Ker
Judgement Date : 25 October, 2024

Kerala High Court

C.Muthukumar vs The Cochin Port Trust on 25 October, 2024

                                    1

  WP(C) No.32611 of 2014                               2024:KER:79545


                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                 PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISANKAR V. MENON

     FRIDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1946

                         WP(C) NO. 32611 OF 2014


PETITIONER:

              C.MUTHUKUMAR, AGED 47 YEARS,
              STAFF NO.13155, LASCAR, HARBOUR MASTER'S DIVISION,
              MARINE DEPARTMENT, COCHIN PORT TRUST,
              ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.


              BY ADVS.
              KALEESWARAM RAJ
              THULASI K. RAJ(K/000814/2015)
              APARNA NARAYAN MENON(K/385/2021)
              CHINNU MARIA ANTONY(K/3363/2022)


RESPONDENTS:

    1         THE COCHIN PORT TRUST,
              REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, WILLINGDON ISLAND,
              KOCHI - 682 009.

    2         THE CHAIRMAN, COCHIN PORT TRUST,
              WILLINGDON ISLAND, KOCHI - 682 009.

    3         THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR,
              COCHIN PORT TRUST, WILLINGDON ISLAND,
              KOCHI - 682 009.

    4         THE HARBOUR MASTER, COCHIN PORT TRUST,
              WILLINGDON ISLAND, KOCHI - 682 009.

    5         THE MARINE ENGINEERING SUPERINTENDENT,
              COCHIN PORT TRUST, WILLINGDON ISLAND,
              KOCHI - 682 009.
                                  2

  WP(C) No.32611 of 2014                           2024:KER:79545


          BY ADVS.
          SRI.K.ANAND (SR.)
          SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN
          SRI.S.VISHNU FOR RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2


THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25.10.2024,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                    3

  WP(C) No.32611 of 2014                              2024:KER:79545



                             JUDGMENT

The petitioner, while working as Lascar with the 1 st respondent

herein, sought for appointment by promotion through the selection

process, to the post of Chargeman Gr. II. The afore application was

based on Exts.P1 and P3, which prescribed the qualifications. It is

pointed out that in 2014, Ext.P2 was issued prescribing an additional

condition as a required qualification, which was not finding a place in

Exts.P1 and P3. It is pointing out the above that the petitioner has

filed the captioned writ petition challenging Ext.P3 and also seeking

a direction to the respondents to fill up the vacancy to the post of

Chargeman Gr. II, following Ext.P3 recruitment rules.

2. In the counter affidavit filed by the 1st respondent herein

dated 10.07.2015, it is pointed out that Ext.P2 was subsequently

withdrawn by the 1st respondent. Later, the petitioner produced a

fresh circular at Ext.P9, again seeking to make appointments based

on a fresh set of qualifications required for being appointed to the

post of Chargeman Gr.II. Though Ext.P9 was sought to be stayed by

WP(C) No.32611 of 2014 2024:KER:79545

this Court, this Court permitted the respondents to proceed based on

Ext.P9, further directing that if any appointments are made, such

appointments would be subject to the result of the writ petition.

2. I have heard Kum.Thulasi K. Raj, the learned counsel for the

petitioner, and Sri.S.Vishnu, the learned counsel for respondents 1

and 2.

3. The short issue arising for consideration in this writ petition

is as to whether the petitioner is entitled to an appointment based

on Ext.P3 as claimed by him.

4. The fact that Ext.P2 is withdrawn is borne out of the counter

affidavit filed by the 1st respondent. Subsequently, Ext.P9 has been

issued and it is pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondent

that the appointments have also been carried out to the post of

Chargeman Gr.II, in paragraph 13 of the additional counter affidavit

dated 15.09.2018. In the light of the averments contained in

paragraph 13 of the additional counter affidavit dated 15.09.2018, it

is seen that, as of now, others have been appointed, and they are

WP(C) No.32611 of 2014 2024:KER:79545

holding the post to which they have been appointed. Unless and until,

they are also brought on record, this Court may not be justified in

considering the contentions raised by the learned counsel of the

petitioner that even on the face of Ext.P9, the petitioner is entitled

to be considered based on the qualifications which were prescribed

at the time of the vacancy arising in 2014.

5. However, this Court notices the contention raised by the

learned counsel for the petitioner that even after the appointments,

as stated in Ext.P13 of the aforesaid additional affidavit, there are

certain unfilled vacancies for the post of Chargeman Gr.II.

6. In such circumstances, this writ petition would stand

disposed of finding as under:

i. The prayers made in the writ petition based on

Ext.P3 cannot be considered without impleading the

persons who have already been appointed, as pointed

out in the additional affidavit.

ii. The petitioner is to be considered for appointment to

WP(C) No.32611 of 2014 2024:KER:79545

the post of Chargeman Gr.II, if there is any post which

is lying unoccupied as on date.

iii. The petitioner to make an appropriate representation

in that regard before the 1st respondent, and if such

an application is filed, the 1st respondent to consider

the claim of the petitioner and to make appointments,

if there are any such vacancies in accordance with law

and if the 1st respondent intends to fill up any such

vacancy as pointed out by the learned counsel for the

petitioner.

Sd/-

                                     HARISANKAR V. MENON
                                              JUDGE
ln


WP(C) No.32611 of 2014                              2024:KER:79545



                 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 32611/2014

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 12.07.2007.

EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 11.09.2014.

EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF THE RECRUITMENT RULE FOR THE POST OF CHARGEMAN GR.II.

EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26.09.2014.

EXHIBIT P5. TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF APPRECIATION ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE PORT ON 17.11.2005.

EXHIBIT P6. TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF COMMENDATION ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER ON THE PORT DAY 2014.

EXHIBIT P7. TRUE COPY OF THE AWARD IN I.D.NO.39/08.

EXHIBIT P8. TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 29.08.2014 IN W.P.(C)NO.23334/2011.

EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR ON 03.03.2017.

EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 05.10.2018 ALONG WITH THE ENCLOSED RELEVANT EXTRACT OF MINUTES.

RESPONDENTS'EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT R3(B) TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTIONS NO.26 DATED 29.05.2013 FOR THE BOARD ALONG WITH RELEVANT AGENDA NOTES.

EXHIBIT R3(C) TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTIONS NO.66 DATED 14.08.2013 OF THE BOARD ALONG WITH RELEVANT AGENDA NOTE.

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter