Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Tribunal’s Compensation Exceeding Claimed Amount Found Just and Fair Under Motor Vehicles Act: No Deduction Errors Warrant Reduction: Gujrat High Court    |     When Two Accused Face Identical Charges, One Cannot Be Convicted While the Other is Acquitted: Supreme Court Emphasizes Principle of Parity in Acquittal    |     Supreme Court Limits Interim Protection for Financial Institutions, Modifies Order on FIRs Filed by Borrowers    |     Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail in Methamphetamine Case After Delay in Chemical Analysis Report    |     No Sign of Recent Intercourse; No Injury Was Found On Her Body Or Private Parts: Gauhati High Court Acquits Two In Gang Rape Case    |     Failure to Disclose Relationship with Key Stakeholder Led to Setting Aside of Arbitral Award: Gujarat High Court    |     Strict Compliance with UAPA's 7-Day Timeline for Sanctions is Essential:  Supreme Court    |     PAT Teachers Entitled to Regularization from 2014, Quashes Prospective Regularization as Arbitrary: Himachal Pradesh High Court    |     Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Anonymity Protections for Victims in Sensitive Cases: Right to Privacy Prevails Over Right to Information    |     Certified Copy of Will Admissible Under Registration Act, 1908: Allahabad HC Dismisses Plea for Production of Original Will    |     Injuries on Non-Vital Parts Do Not Warrant Conviction for Attempt to Murder: Madhya Pradesh High Court Modifies Conviction Under Section 307 IPC to Section 326 IPC    |     Classification Based on Wikipedia Data Inadmissible; Tribunal to Reassess Using Actual Financial Records: PH High Court Orders Reconsideration of Wage Dispute    |     Mere Delay in Initiation Does Not Justify Reduction of Damages: Jharkhand High Court on Provident Fund Defaults    |     Legatee Can Continue Suit Without Probate, But Decree Contingent on Probate Approval: Orissa High Court    |     An Award that Shocks the Conscience of the Court Cannot Stand, Especially When Public Money is Involved: Calcutta HC Reduces Quantum by Half    |     Trademark Transaction Within Territoriality Principle Subject to Indian Tax Laws: Bombay High Court Dismisses Hindustan Unilever's Petition on Non-Deduction of TDS    |     Concealment of Material Facts Bars Relief under Article 226: SC Reprimands Petitioners for Lack of Bonafides    |     Without Determination of the Will's Genuineness, Partition is Impossible: Supreme Court on Liberal Approach to Pleading Amendments    |     Candidates Cannot Challenge a Selection Process After Participating Without Protest : Delhi High Court Upholds ISRO's Administrative Officer Recruitment    |    

Promotion Eligibility of Kerala Water Authority Engineers: Diploma Promotees Cannot Switch to Degree Quota: Kerala HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam has clarified the rules surrounding the promotion eligibility of Assistant Engineers in the Kerala Water Authority (KWA). Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V, presiding over the case, ruled that engineers promoted through the Diploma quota cannot subsequently switch to the Degree quota for further promotions.

The court was dealing with a dispute regarding the seniority and promotion of Assistant Engineers who entered service through different quotas. The key legal issue was whether engineers promoted from the Diploma quota could be included in the seniority list for Degree quota promotions. The judgment explicitly states, “the action of including respondents 4 to 10 in Ext.P12 final seniority list of directly recruited Assistant Engineers is clearly illegal.”

Justice Vijayaraghavan observed, “Assistant Engineers are appointed through two primary methods: direct recruitment from the open market and internal recruitment of candidates holding an Engineering Degree, as well as promotion from Draftsman Grade 1 positions for those with an Engineering Diploma.” This distinction, as per the Court, necessitates maintaining separate seniority lists for each category.

The judgment extensively referred to the Kerala Public Health Engineering Subordinate Service Special Rules and the Kerala Public Health Engineering Service Special Rules. These rules stipulate the service conditions of employees and form the basis of the court’s decision.

The Court further quoted from its judgment, “Respondents 4 to 10, while serving as Overseers in the KWA, responded to a PSC notification and were included in the Ext.P8 rank list for direct recruitment. However, they opted not to pursue direct recruitment as Assistant Engineers, presumably due to the advantages and benefits that such a course offered to them.”

This ruling has significant implications for the promotion policies within the Kerala Water Authority. It clarifies that the path of promotion for engineers is determined by the quota through which they initially entered service, whether by direct recruitment or through promotion from the Diploma quota.

Date of Decision: 22nd November 2023

Sajithabai and Others VS Kerala Water Authority and Others

Similar News