Laxrnan Anant Mesta v. Karnataka Cashew Development Corporation Ltd.

Judgment

2. Karnataka Cashew Development Corporation Ltd., Krishna Towers Lady Hill, Mangalore-575006, Repd. By Its Managing Director. The Divisional Manager Karnataka Cashew Development Corporation Ltd., Kumta Division, At Kumta, U.K. District. Petitioner 3 The Plantation Superintendent, Karnataka Cashew Development Corporation Ltd., Bhatkal Unit, At Honavar, U.K District. Respondents

(By Sri,V.R,Datar, Adv. for Ri; Sri.T.R.Shridhar, Adv. for R2 & R3) This Writ Petition is filed Under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to command the Ri-Corporation to consider the recommendations of R2 and R3 as per Anxs-G and H and promote the petitioner to the cadre of Supervisor in the service respondent- Corporation with all monetary benefits flowing therefrom. This writ petition coming on for hearing this day, the Court made the following: ORDER In the instant case petitioner has sought for a mandamus directing the 1st respondent Corporation consider recommendations of 2nd and 3rd respondents vide Annexures-G and H and promote the petitioner to the cadre of Supervisor in the service of the 1t respondent Corporation with all monetary benefits flowing therefrom, in the interest of justice and equity.

2. The grievance of petitioner in the instant case is that, he has entered into service as Plantation Mali on 29.09.1978 and 3 has been posted in the office of the Karnataka Forest Plantation at Puttur Division, Puttur. The said office wound up in 1981 and has been amalgamated in the Karnataka Cashew Development Corporation Ltd. Petitioner has been absolved in the service of the l respondent Corporation in the cadre as a Plantation Mali. On 17.06.1992 petitioner has been promoted to the cadre of Senior Field Assistant and was posted at Kumta Division of the 1K respondent Corporation and presently he is working as a Senior Field Assistant at Bhatkal Unit of the i respondent Corporation. The 1t respondent Corporation is government by the Kamataka Forest Department Services (Recruitment) Rules,

1957. The cadre of Senior Field Assistant in the 1K respondent Corporation is equivalent to Forest Guard of the Karnataka Government Forest Department. The next cadre to the post of Senior Field Assistant in the it respondent Corporation is Supervisor, which is equivalent to Forester in the Forest Department. The Karnataka Forest Department Services (Recruitment) Rules, 1957, specifies the requisite qualification and eligibility for the post of Forester, which is equivalent to the cadre of Supervisor in the 1 respondent Corporation. It specifies 4- 4 that a Forest Guard with S.S.L.C. or equivalent qualification and who has secured first rank in the Forest Guards Training Examination conducted by the Department shall be deputed to the Foresters Training School, Dandeli and on successful completion of training such official shall be appointed as a Forester against the vacancy. As per the Notification No.AFD 7 FTC 74, Bangalore dated 17th/ 18th June 1975 which was published and with which Schedule to the Karnataka Forest Department Services (Recruitment) Rules, 1957, has been amended as to the requisite qualification for the post of Forester. It is specified that the Forest Guard who has passed S.S.L.C. or equivalent examination and who has obtained first rank in the Forest Guards Training Examination shall be eligible appointment as a Forester,

3. It is the case of petitioner that he completed the Guards Training Examination on 26.10.1995 and he stood first. The copy of the report of the Aranya Krashikadhikarigalavara Kacheri, Dakshina Valaya, Madikeri dated 26.10.1995 is produced at Annexure—C. The name of petitioner is shown at Si. No.3 in the / 5 said list and others name therein relates to other camps other than the petitioner’s camp. Thus, the petitioner possess a requisite qualification and eligibility for the post of Forester which is equivalent to the cadre of Supervisor in the service of 1st respondent Corporation. Inspite of requisite qualification and eligibility for promotion of Supervisor, his case has not been taken into consideration, Inspite of making all his efforts, his request has not been considered that too without taking into consideration recommendation forwarded 3rd respondent vide Annexures-G and H. He was in service of the Corporation since from 29.09.1978 and completed almost 24 years of service and in view of length of service also he is entitled time bond promotion to the next cadre. Taking into consideration that he has completed more than 26 years in respondent No. 1 Corporation, he is eligible for promotion to the cadre of Supervisor. Due to inaction on the part of the 1st respondent in not taking any decision on the recommendation of 2 and 3 respondent and withdrawal decision taken to depute the petitioner training is quite unjust and arbitrary. Therefore, having no other alternative or efficacious remedy, he 6 has presented this petition, seeking the appropriate reliefs as stated supra.

4. I have gone through the grounds urged by petitioner carefully and perused the enclosures produced along with writ petition. The grievance of petitioner is that, having stood first in the training camp and having requisite qualification he is eligible to be appointed as Forester, which is equivalent to supervisor. Taking his age, avocation, length of service and unblemish records, the respondent Corporation ought to have considered his case for promotion to the post of Supervisor by extending all the benefits, if found otherwise eligible. Inspite of his efforts in oral and writing, the 1st respondent Corporation has not taken a decision. Keeping all these factors into consideration he is constrained to redress his grievance by filing the petition.

5. Keeping the request of the petitioner in abeyance and not taking any decision is not justifiable. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits and demerits of the case, the instant petition stands disposed of, with a direction to the 1St 7 .4 7 respondent Corporation to consider the request of petitioner and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible at any rate with a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. With these observations, the instant petition stands disposed of. hnm/ j/a juD9E