High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2017-05-30Petition dismissed; no relief granted.

Imbichikuttan E. v. University of Calicut and Vice Chancellor, University of Calicut

Case / Petition Number:WP(C).No. 14874 of 2017 (H)

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: P.V.ASHA
Judgment Date: 2017-05-30
Court Decision / Holding: Writ petition dismissed; no relief granted. The court found no violation of fundamental rights or statutory rights and declined to interfere under Article 226.
Final Disposition: Petition dismissed; no relief granted.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

IMBICHIKUTTAN E., Junior Foreman, Calicut University Press

Respondents

UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, represented by its Registrar, Calicut University
VICE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Sri. T.B. Hood
• Smt. M. Isha
• Sri. Amal Kasha

Counsels for Respondents

• Sri. P.C. Sasidharan, SC, Calicut University

Case Synopsis & Summary

The petitioner, Imbichikuttan E., a Junior Foreman in the Calicut University Press, approached the Kerala High Court seeking promotion to General Foreman and, potentially, to Assistant Superintendent, arguing that he is the senior-most qualified employee and that vacancies existed since 2012. He asserts that successive promotions have not been granted, despite earlier promotions—Ravindran in 2009—and that no Senior Foreman post exists at the University Press, which blocks the promotion chain under Kerala Government Press Subordinate Service Special Rules. The petitioner challenged reliance on institutional rules that, he contends, deprive him of a rightful promotional opportunity and argued that the Calicut University Ordinance governing appointments does not cover the relevant posts; he also notes that the statute amendment process is underway, with a proposed amendment to allow promotions from additional feeder categories. The University contends that the Special Rules, implemented through an interim Court order, have effectively blocked promotions since 2012, and that the draft amendments are still under consideration by authorities. The court observed that vacancies arising in 2012 remain, with no promotions to fill them, and emphasized that the petitioner’s retirement was imminent (May 2017). It held no violation of fundamental rights or statutory rights and dismissed the petition, declining to direct promotion or other relief.

Provisions of Law Cited

Article 226 of the Constitution of IndiaKerala Government Press Subordinate Service Special RulesCalicut University OrdinanceInterim order dated 15.12.2009 in W.P.(C) No.15948 of 2009

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner contends that he is the senior-most qualified for promotion to General Foreman and possibly Assistant Superintendent, that vacancies existed since 2012, and that promotions have been blocked by the Kerala Government Press Subordinate Service Special Rules and the lack of a Senior Foreman post. He argues that amendments to the statute and ordinance are pending and that the proposed draft rules permit promotion from broader feeder categories; he seeks a direction to grant promotion under the draft rules and notes that earlier orders and representations were not acted upon.

Contentions of Respondents

The University argues that the Special Rules, applicable to the University Press technical staff, block promotions to General Foreman from 2012 onward due to the absence of a Senior Foreman post. It asserts that Ravindran’s 2009 promotion was prior to the interim order and that the 2015–2016 note and subsequent draft amendments are under consideration. The University emphasizes that promotions cannot occur in the absence of a valid statutory framework and that the petitioner has no enforceable right to promotion given vacancies and the need to frame statutes and ordinances with the Chancellor’s approval.

Cited Precedents (3)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Preetha S. Nair v. Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit	2009 (4) KHC 439	Mentioned Only	Cited to note the court’s view in a similar context that appointments may require statutory framing before acting; used as background reference rather than as a controlling ruling in the present case.
Appeal (Civil) 322 of 2007 (Apex Court)	Appeal (Civil) 322 of 2007	Positive	Referenced in Ext.P15 to support implementation of the Government Press Special Rules as part of the Court’s consideration; treated as favorable precedent for the rule-based restriction on promotions.
W.P.(C) No.15948 of 2009	W.P.(C) No.15948 of 2009	Mentioned Only	Cited in relation to interim order and background for the Special Rules; used as background authority rather than direct binding precedent in the decision.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Imbichikuttan E. v. University of Calicut and Vice Chancellor, University of Calicut and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** **THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA** **TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF MAY 2017/9TH JYAISHTA, 1939** **WP(C).No. 14874 of 2017 (H) ----------------------------** **PETITIONER(S): -------------** **IMBICHIKUTTAN E.,** **JUNIOR FOREMAN, COMPOSING SECTION, CALICUT UNIVERSITY PRESS, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., 673 635.** **BY ADVS.SRI.T.B.HOOD SMT.M.ISHA SRI.AMAL KASHA** ## **RESPONDENT(S):** **--------------** **1. UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., 673 635.** **2. VICE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., 673 635.** **BY SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, CALICUT UNIVERSITY** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-05-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **SKG** **WP(C).No. 14874 of 2017 (H) ----------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** - **PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF SECONDARY SCHOOL LEAVING CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PASS CERTIFICATE IN COMPOSITORS WORK (LOWER) AND BOOK BINDING (LOWER) EXAMINATIONS OF THE PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PASS CERTIFICATE IN PROOF READERS WORK (LOWER) EXAMINATIONS OF THE PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PASS CERTIFICATE IN PROOF READERS WORK (LOWER) EXAMINATION OF THE PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PASS CERTIFICATE IN TYPEWRITING ENGLISH (LOWER) OF THE PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PASS CERTIFICATE IN CERTIFICATE IN COMPUTER AND DTP OPERATION EXAMINATIONS OF PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE PASS CERTIFICATE IN LOWER EXAMINATION IN MACHINE WORK OF THE PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE UNIVERSITY ORDER DATED 14.02.2005 PROMOTING THE PETITIONER AS ASSISTANT FOREMAN.** - **EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE UNIVERSITY ORDER DATED 27.05.2009 PROMOTING THE PETITIONER AS JUNIOR FOREMAN.** - **EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE MINUTES OF THE SYNDICATE MEETING HELD ON 20.09.1988.** - **EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 04.12.2015 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 18.02.2016 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.** **SKG** **WP(C).No. 14874 of 2017 (H)** **----------------------------** **EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE UNIVERSITY NOTE DATE 21.07.2015 SUBMITTED TO THE STATUTE AMENDMENT COMMITTEE.** **EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 21.03.2017 GIVEN TO THE PETITIONER UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT.** **EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE UNIVERSITY ORDER DATED 03.02.2011.** **RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS** **----------------------NIL** **/TRUE COPY/** **P.S. TO JUDGE** **SKG** ## **P.V.ASHA, J.** ----------------------------------------------------- ## W.P(C) No.14874 of 2017-H ---------------------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 30[th] day of May, 2017 ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner, who is working as Junior Foreman in the Calicut University Press and due to retire from service on 31.5.2017, has filed this writ petition complaining denial of promotion as General Foreman as well a Assistant Superintendent, despite the fact that he is the senior most qualified hand and there are vacancies existing. 2. The petitioner was appointed as Compositor Gr.II in the University Press in the year 1982, on being sponsored by the employment exchange. Thereafter, he was given regular appointment as Compositor Gr.II in February, 1986. He was promoted as Assistant Foreman as per Ext.P8 order dated 14.02.2005. He was further promoted as Junior Foreman as per Ext.P9 order dated 27.05.2009. It is stated that his promotion was against the vacancy which arose on promotion of Sri. Ravindran, the then incumbent of the post as General Foreman. But the petitioner did not get any further promotion. It is stated W.P(C) No.14874 of 2017-H 2 that Mr.Padmarajan retired in May, 2015 and thereafter Sri M.Krishna Das retired in November, 2015 without getting promotion as General Foreman. As at present he is the senior most Junior Foreman. It is pointed out that the petitioner had submitted Ext.P11 representation on 4.12.2015 requesting for promotion as General Foreman. The petitioner says that the posts in the University Press are not included in the Calicut University Ordinance which governs the method of appointment and qualification to the posts under the University. It is stated that the post of Senior Foreman is not created in the University so far. 3. It is stated that the Kerala Government Press Subordinate Service Special Rules, are made applicable to the technical staff of the University Press as per Ext.P15 order dated 3.02.2011 of the University. As per those special rules, promotion to the post of General Foreman is made from the post of Senior Foreman. But there is no post of Senior Foreman in the University Press. That was the reason stated for not promoting the petitioner as well as seniors who retired from service in 2015 without getting promotion as General Foreman. At the same time, it is pointed out that Sri Ravindran, who retired from W.P(C) No.14874 of 2017-H 3 service in 2012 from the post of General Foreman was the last person who was promoted despite the fact that he was not promoted to the post of Senior Foreman. The representation submitted by the petitioner was rejected as per Ext.P12 letter dated 18.02.2016 stating that the matter of promotion to the post of General Foreman was placed before the Statute Amendment Committee as per note dated 21.07.2015 and further steps would be taken on receiving its resolution. 4. The petitioner submits that the proposed ordinance is yet to be issued and follow up action on the note proposed to the statute amendment committee is yet to be commenced and completed. The petitioner points out that Ext.P13 proposal for amendment to the proposed ordinance provides for promotion to the post of General Foreman from among other feeder categories in the absence of qualified Senior Foreman. It is stated that the statute amendment committee has placed the note, which is produced herein as Ext.P13, before the Syndicate Sub Committee and therefore the respondent shall be directed to grant promotion to the petitioner in accordance with the draft rules . 5. The respondent University has filed a statement. W.P(C) No.14874 of 2017-H 4 According to them, the promotional avenues for Junior Foreman are blocked due to implementation of Kerala Government Press Subordinate Service Special Rules in the University, as per U.O. Note No.Ad A3/8785/88 Vol.III dated 3.2.2011, which in turn was issued in terms of the interim order dated 15.12.2009 of this Court in W.P.(C) No.15948 of 2009. It is stated that the matter was placed before the statute amendment committee and its recommendation was placed before the Syndicate sub committee on statute amendment, which has in its meeting held on 19.03.2016 considered the same and resolved to recommend amendment in the method of appointment of General Foreman including the Junior Foreman as feeder category for promotion and the proposal for amendment is under consideration of the Chancellor. It is stated that Sri. Ravindran was promoted as General Foreman on 27.05.2009 prior to the interim order passed on 15.12.2009, based on which the Special Rules of Government Press Subordinate Service were implemented. 6. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 7. It is seen that the vacancies against which the W.P(C) No.14874 of 2017-H 5 petitioner claims promotion arose in the year 2012, on retirement of Sri. Raveendran, who was promoted in May 2009. The seniors to the petitioner in the post of Junior Foreman retired from service in May and November, 2015 respectively without getting promotion. From 2012 onwards the University has not made any promotion. 8. It is the common case that the University has implemented the Kerala Government Press Subordinate Service Special Rules as per Ext.P15 order based on an interim order of this Court and that the Special Rules stood in the way of promotion to the post of General Foreman all these years right from 2012. Ext.P15 order refers to the judgment of the Apex Court in Appeal (Civil) 322 of 2007 as well as the judgment dated 15.12.2009 in W.P.(C) No.15948 of 2009. The said order is seen to have been issued accepting the recommendation of the committee constituted by the committee of the syndicate to study the matter of implementation of the judgment of the Apex Court. From the judgment of this Court, as available in the website of the High Court, it is seen that one Padmajan filed that writ petition claiming promotion as General Foreman. It is also seen that Sri. Ravindran, who was the 2[nd] respondent therein, was W.P(C) No.14874 of 2017-H 6 granted promotion subject to the implementation of the verdict of the Apex Court and in the light of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Apex Court had finally decided the matter, that writ petition was disposed of directing the University to take a final decision in the matter in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court, within a period of 2 months. Ext.P15 order is seen issued in the above back ground. As a result, the post of General Foreman has remained vacant since the year 2012. 9. The petitioner cannot have any right to insist that he should be granted promotion, in such circumstances as long as he is not superseded or the vacancy is filled up by any outsider or otherwise. The petitioner cannot also have any right to insist that the University should make appointment to a post which remains vacant since 2012, on the basis of a proposed amendment to a proposed ordinance. Moreover, the judgment in **Preetha S. Nair v. Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit** [2009 (4) KHC 439] also stares at the petitioner and the University, wherein the Division Bench of this Court held that appointment to the posts (in that case the post of Public Relations Officer) cannot be made before framing of Statutes W.P(C) No.14874 of 2017-H 7 prescribing the qualifications and method of appointment to the post with the approval of the Chancellor. Provisions considered therein are more or less similar to those in Calicut University also. 10. In that view of the matter, none of the fundamental rights or statutory rights of the petitioner can be said to have been violated. It is also pertinent to note that this writ petition was one filed on 27.04.2017, just 33 days before 31.05.2007, the date on which the petitioner is due to retire on superannuation. Hence I do not find any circumstance warranting any interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- **(P.V.ASHA, JUDGE)** rtr/