SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Ker) 967

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
SUNIL THOMAS, J.
Selvakumar N., S/o. Late Nadarajan Chettiyar - Petitioner
Versus
Kerala State Financial Enterprises Limited (KSFE) & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) No. 11923 of 2020
Decided On : 29-11-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Liji J. Vadakedom, Smt. Rexy Elizabeth Thomas, Sri. Rajeev Jyothish George.
For the Respondent: Sri. K. John Mathai, Sri. Joson Manavalan, Sri. Kuryan Thomas, Sri. Paulose C. Abraham, SC, Sri. M. Gopikrishnan Nambiar.

Point of law: Explanation which provides that, the relinquishment of right of promotion shall entail loss of seniority, only clarifies the position flowing from Rule 38.

Headnote:

Service Matter – Promotion - Relinquishment of promotion - Junior Assistant - Promoted thereafter and working as Assistant Manager (Non Cadre) at Pala-II Branch. His elder son aged 17 years is a differently abled child with 75% disability and is handicapped by Autism (Attention Deficit Hyper Active Disorder (ADHD)). Since the child required constant attention of the petitioner and his wife, petitioner submitted Ext.P3 representation before the KSFE seeking favourable posting on promotion, at some station near his residence.

Finding of the Court:

It is upto the petitioner to decide whether he should relinquish his right forever or choose the promotion. Once it is brought to the notice that, under Ext.R1(a), he is not entitled to exercise the option more than once, the application should have been rejected. Hence, I am inclined to set aside the latter portion of Ext.P11, by which, the petitioner was informed that, application will be treated as permanent relinquishment and that, he will not be considered for promotion as Assistant Manger in future. Natural consequence will be to issue fresh order of promotion as and when the vacancy arises.

Result: Writ Petition is allowed.

JUDGMENT :

The writ petitioner joined the service of the first respondent/Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd. ('KSFE' in short) on 06.11.2004 as Junior Assistant. He was promoted thereafter and at present, he is now working as Assistant Manager (Non Cadre) at Pala-II Branch. His elder son aged 17 years is a differently abled child with 75% disability and is handicapped by Autism (Attention Deficit Hyper Active Disorder (ADHD)). Since the child required constant attention of the petitioner and his wife, petitioner submitted Ext.P3 representation before the KSFE seeking favourable posting on promotion, at some station near his residence. While so, he was issued with Ext.P4 promotion order dated 29.11.2016. He submitted a representation seeking favourable posting. Consequently, by Ext.P6 transfer order, he was posted at Kothamangalam, which was 60 kms away from the residence of the petitioner. Lamenting that the said posting also caused much inconvenience to him, by Ext.P7 communication dated 26.12.2016, he requested for temporary relinquishment of his promotion for a period of one year or as and when vacancy arises in a nearby branch, whichever was earlier. This was accepted by Ext.P8 memo dated 03.01.2017. Immediately, on completion of one year period, by Ext.P9, the petitioner was promoted and posted at Piravom. Again, claiming that, he was unable to accept the posting at Piravom, which was about 40kms away from his residence, the petitioner submitted Ext.P10 representation requesting to extend the period of relinquishment for promotion, for a further period of two years from 29.12.2017. By Ext.P11 order dated 16.03.2018, he was informed that, relinquishment of promotion was permitted only once in service, as per Rule 38 of KSSR. Hence, his request for extension of relinquishment for a further period could not be considered and he was informed that, his relinquishment for promotion will be treated as permanent relinquishment. He was also informed that, he will not be considered for promotion as Assistant Manager in future.

2. Aggrieved by Ext.P11, to the extent of treating his application as one for permanent relinquishment and informing him that, he will not be considered for promotion as Assistant Manager in future, petitioner has approached this Court. The contention of the writ petitioner was that, KSFE was not justified in treating his application for temporary relinquishment for a limited period of two years as an application for permanent relinquishment and thereby, deny him his due promotion, forever. The reliefs sought in the Writ Petition was to quash Ext.P11 and to direct the first respondent to consider Ext.P12 claim for promotion to the post of Assistant Manager.

3. The respondent/KSFE appeared and filed counter affidavit. It was stated that, petitioner was entitled to make a temporary relinquishment only once during the tenure, by virtue of GO(P).No.39/91/P & ARD dated 07.12.1991 produced along with the counter affidavit as Ext.R1(a). As per the above guidelines, temporary relinquishment from one grade to another can be permitted only once in the service of an officer. The petitioner was considered for promotion to permanent vacancy and an employee can withdraw the relinquishment of promotion, only if he has been offered a provisional promotion. Guidelines further stated that the employees have been relinquishing promotion for short period for the same grade, which have resulted in severe administrative inconveniences. To tide over that difficulty, the Government had issued Ext.R1(a) guidelines. As per the guidelines, temporary relinquishment from one grade to another shall be permitted only once in the service of an officer.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the writ petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the KSFE.

5. Basic facts are not in dispute. The short question that arises for consideration is whether Ext.P11 order, treating Ext.P10 application for temporary relinquishment for a period of two years

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top