High Court of KeralaWP(C)/31020/2005closed

S.Mini v. Airport Authority Of India

2015-11-02Honourable Mr.Justice K.Vinod Chandran4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:- THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/11TH KARTHIKA, 1937 W.P.(C).No.31020 of 2005 (P) -------------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S):- -------------------------- S.MINI, SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT (OFFICE), OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT, AAI (IAD), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AIRPORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS.SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM SRI.K.B.ARUNKUMAR RESPONDENT(S):- ----------------------------

1. AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, RAJEEV GANDHI BHAVAN, SAFDARJUNG, NEW DELHI.

2. AIRPORT DIRECTOR, AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA (IAD), TRIVANDRUM INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

3. SUSEELA THOMAS, SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT (OFFICE) AAI (IAD), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AIRPORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

4. C.N. GIRIJA SASI, SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OFFICE) AAI (IAD), THIRUVAANTHAPURAM AIRPORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

5. M. BHASKARAN, SENIOR ASSISTANT (OFFICE) AAI (IAD), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AIRPORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2 BY ADVOCATE SRI.V.SANTHARAM.

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-

W.P.(C).NO.31020 OF 2005-P APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- ------------------------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.12.2002 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.08.2003 IN O.P.NO.4044/2003 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 08.04.2005 IN W.A.NO.1752/2003 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE SENIORITY LIST FOR THE POST OF SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT (OFFICE).

EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE SENIORITY LIST FOR THE POST OF SENIOR ASSISTANT (OFFICE).

EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISED SENIORITY LIST ALONG WITH THE FORWARDING LETTER DATED 30L08.2005.

EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.08.2005 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 31.08.2005 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 23.06.2005 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT REGARDING RESTRUCTURING.

EXT.P9(a) THE LEGIBLE COPY OF EXHIBIT P9 LETTER DATED 23.06.2005. EXT.P10 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 04.10.2005 AND THE TABLE OF DECISIONS TAKEN BY THE COMMITTEE.

EXT.P11 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 02.11.2005 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.

EXT.P12 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 02.11.2005 GRANTING PROMOTION TO 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXT.P12(a) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 02.11.2005 GRANTING PROMOTION TO 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXT.P12(b) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 02.11.2005 GRANTING PROMOTION TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT.

W.P.(C).NO.31020 OF 2005-P - 2 - EXT.P13 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 21.11.2005 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER B EFORE THE 1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXT.P14 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDERS DATED 21.11.2005 RE-FIXING THE SALARY OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXT.P14(a) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDERS DATED 21.11.2005 RE-FIXING THE SALARY OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXT.P14(b) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDERS DATED 21.11.2005 RE-FIXING THE SALARY OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- ---------------------------------------- NIL.

vku/- [ true copy ]

K. Vinod Chandran, J ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.31020 of 2005-P ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 02nd day of November, 2015

JUDGMENT

The petitioner challenged Exhibits P9 and P10 on the apprehension that an implementation of such orders would affect her seniority in Exhibit P6. In fact, the petitioner was included in Exhibit P6 as a Senior Superintendent (Office) on the basis of Exhibit P3 judgment. The petitioner apprehended that implementation of Exhibits P9 and P10 would interfere with her seniority in Exhibit P6 and also affect her further promotions. The petitioner, however, is said to have been promoted as an Assistant Manager (Commercial) with effect from 15.12.2014. Even before that she was given Selection Grade also.

2. In the above circumstance, the apprehension expressed by the petitioner as to she being denied of further promotions, does not survive. In any any event, if the petitioner has any grievance, the petitioner would have to take up the matter before the appropriate authority. The writ petition is closed recording the statement of respondents 1 and 2 dated 21.10.2015.

Sd/- K.Vinod Chandran Judge.

vku/- [ true copy ]