High CourtsSingle Bench(2010) 09 KL CK 0013

R. Rajeevkumar and Others vs The State of Kerala, The Director of Health Services and Anithadevi N.J.

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 9 September 2010

HON’BLE JUDGES
S. Siri Jagan, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) No. 28080 of 2010 (H)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 388 words

S. Siri Jagan, J.—The petitioners are Junior Health Inspectors Grade II. A provisional seniority list has been prepared, against which, the petitioners have submitted their objections regarding the seniority assigned to them. Thereafter, a final seniority list has been published. The petitioners are challenging that final seniority list in this writ petition. According to the petitioners, that seniority list has been prepared against the decisions of this Court, which cannot be permitted in law.

2.

The learned Government Pleader raises a preliminary objection that against the final seniority list and disputes in respect thereof, the petitioners have an effective alternative remedy by way of approaching the Government under Rule 27B of Part II of the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules, 1958. Rule 27B reads thus:

27B. In case of disputes regarding seniority and matters connected with it by reason of any order of Government or any order of an authority subordinate to Government, representations for reconsideration of such order shall be submitted to Government by the aggrieved person within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the order, or the date of publication of the order in the Kerala Gazette whichever is later.

3.

Although the learned Counsel for the petitioners would vehemently argue that that is not an effective alternate remedy, I am unable to agree. Admittedly, the seniority list has been prepared by an authority subordinate to the Government and Rule 27B gives power to the Government to consider disputes regarding the seniority. Therefore, it is only appropriate that the petitioners approach the Government under Rule 27B first. The learned Counsel for the petitioners would point out that it would be a travesty of justice if in the meanwhile, promotions are made on the basis of the illegal seniority list. I am of opinion that the petitioners can very well seek stay of further promotions pending consideration of the petitioners'' application under Rule 27B. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to approach the Government under Rule 27B of the KS&SSR. If such a petition is filed, the Government shall consider and pass orders thereon within three months from the date of receipt of the petition. If the petitioners move for stay, that also shall be considered by the Government appropriately.