BEFORE JALA BHAVAN

CHIEF MINISTER RESIDENCE

NEWS COVERAGE

FOLLOWING WRONG RATIO

As per KPHESS Special rules, the ratio among the promotes and direct recruits are 7 : 3 with retrospective effect from 01.04.1968 in the post of Draughtsman Grade I. But the KWA is effecting promotion in the ratio of 1 : 1 ( See the 1st line of the above order)

OUR PRESIDENT AND GENERAL SECRETARY

Babu Divakaran (Ex. Minister)

President

                                                                           Salih KK
                                                                    General Secretary

RESPECTING RETIRED OFFICERS

STATE CONFERENCE

WELCOME TO STATE CONFERENCE

Against the Overseer Grade III

Some of the direct recruits have been filed WP (c) Nos. 6678/12, 17123/12, 18680/12 etc. before the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala against the cadre strength ratio promotions in the date of occurrence of vacancies from the post of Overseer Grade III

CHANNEL REPORT

ENCROACHMENT

The vacancies arising in the post of Assistant Executive Engineer under Diploma quota are to be filled from senior most Assistant Engineer under Diploma quota. Similar method is to be adopted in the feeder categories list of the Assistant Engineer. Unfortunately promotions from Diploma holders were denied and Degree holders occupied the seats of Diploma holders violating the rules and judgment of Hon’ble High court. Accordingly graduates are attained in the higher positions within short service. It is evident from the promotion orders from the Assistant Engineer dated 07.09.15, 15.09.15, etc. in which promotions are ordered from Degree holders to the Diploma quota seats with conditions that consequence imbalance in ratio will be rectified in further promotions. No such a rectification is over so far. As per judgment of Hon’ble high court, there are no powers to promote from Degree holders to Diploma holders seat at any cost. Instead of reverting the Degree holders from the Assistant Executive Engineer occupied in the Diploma quota seats, reverted the Diploma holders from the Assistant Engineers. If affecting the promotion from Diploma holders Assistant Engineers within quota rule, there will be no chance for reversion from any Diploma holders.

GAME FOR DELAYING PROMOTION

The discriminatory stands are taken in the case of promotions. The incumbents are eligible for promotion in the date of occurrence of vacancies but some of the cases it is not following the same. It is evident from the promotion orders issued for the single persons and group of persons. The promotion orders issued for the group of incumbents are without filling the vacancies in time. The vacancies aroused during the different months are filling by the group of incumbents in the date of occurrence of vacancy of junior one. It is a political game for delaying the promotion of particular one. Hence senior most incumbents are losing the eligible date of promotion.

NO NEED OF REGULARIZATION

Even though there is no statutory provision for the regularization in the promotion posts, orders were issued discriminatory for the regularization in the post of Assistant Engineer before the declaration of probation. 

അഭിനന്ദനങ്ങൾ

ബഹു. ജലവിഭവ വകുപ്പു മന്ത്രിയായി നിയമിതനായ ശ്രീ. കൃഷ്ണൻകുട്ടി അവർകൾക്ക് tIcfm hm«À AtXmdnän F©n\o-b-dnwKv Ìm^v Atkm-kn-tb-jsâ അഭിനന്ദനങ്ങൾ.

GENERAL BODY MEETING

General body meeting of our Association will be held on 15.12.2018 Saturday at Classic Hotel, Ernakulam

MALAYALA MANORAMA ON 16.11.2018

LEGAL FIGHT CONTINUING

Our Association had filed W.P.(C).No. 3425/2011 and took out notice by paper publication in Mathrubhoomi daily dated 02.07.11 for fresh seniority list of Draughtsman Grade II in accordance with the Rules. Some of the direct recruits have been impleaded in this case. 

FINAL LIST ON 2012 IN COMPLIANCE OF OUR CASE

Our Association was filed W.P.(C).No. 13966 of 2009(M). The Hon’ble High Court in it’s judgment in W.P.(C).No.13966 of 2009(M) has directed the KWA to finalize the seniority list of Draftsman Gr.II after considering the objections filed by the petitioner Association. The issues involved in the judgment in W.P.(C).No.13966/2009(M) is a dispute on seniority between promotees and direct recruits in the post of Draftsman Gr. II. The Kerala Water Authority was published and finalized seniority list on 2012 in compliance of our case. The ratio is to be maintained by accommodating the promotes in appropriate positions.

LEGAL FIGHT

      The Kerala Public Health Engineering Subordinate Service Special Rues has been adopted by the Kerala Water Authority for the purpose of recruitments and promotions to the various posts in the Kerala Water Authority. Appointment to the post of Draughtsman Grade II is in the ratio I:1 by promotion from Overseer Grade III and by direct recruitment.  The above said quota is to be followed on the basis of cadre strength and not on the basis of available vacancies. The dispute arose on account of the reason that direct recruits were appointed in excess of the quota available to them. The cadre strength of the Draughtsman Grade II is 409 of which 205 will go to promotees and 204 for direct recruits. The Kerala Water Authority has been erroneously making direct appointment to the above said cadre in excess of the quota prescribed by the Special Rules. The same dispute regarding Draughtsman Grade I had come up for consideration before the Division bench of this Hon’ble Court and as per judgment dated 13.07.2000 in W.A.No.1906 of 1998 direction was issued for preparation of fresh seniority list. The Division Bench found that the delay was not due to the fault of the employees and hence K.W.A is liable to rectify the defects.

Our Association was filed O.P.No.4850 of 2000 for not to resort direct recruitment in excess of quota to fill up the vacancies of Draftsman Gr.II, until the deficiency of the promotees are made good with retrospective promotion from Overseer Gr.III in accordance with the ratio 1:1. The Hon’ble High Court in it’s judgment dated 02.01.2006 in O.P.No. 4850/2000- B was pleased to direct the KWA to consider the matter with notice to the first petitioner Association. 

ILLEGAL SUPERNUMERARY

The Kerala Water Authority have been made 83 Nos. of illegal appointments including 42 Nos. of supernumerary in the post of Assistant Engineers during the period of 2011 and 2012. They are misusing their official capacity by filling Degree holders in the various promotion posts of Diploma holders. Thus Diploma holders are stagnated in the lower posts. It is evident from the promotion orders issued from the Degree holders Assistant Engineer to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer in the quota reserved for the Diploma holders violating orders passed by the Hon’ble this court in its Judgment dated 31.12.2012 in WP © No. 19058 of 2012 (F).  As per the Judgment, “no post/vacancy coming within the quota earmarked for the Diploma holders shall be caused to be filled up even temporarily, by accommodating any Degree holder”.

NOT HEARD

Our Association had approached the Hon’ble High Court in the very beginning by filing WP No. 39127of 2003 against the attempt for the excess direct appointment over quota rule. The Hon’ble High Court in its interim order dated 13.07.2004 had directed the official respondents to maintain the prescribed ratio. The said writ petition was disposed off directing the respondents to maintain the cadre strength ratio.

REPORTED DECISIONS

1.        The Hon’ble Division bench of this Court in the decision Aloysius v. Sarada Muraleedharan reported in 1995 (2) KLT 741 held that when promotion is outside the quota, the seniority would be reckoned from the date of the vacancy within the quota. The previous promotion would be regular only from the date of vacancy within the quota and seniority shall be counted from that date and not from the date of his earlier promotion.

2.        The Hon’ble Division bench of this Court in the decision reported in 2009 (3) KLT 274 held that the decision of the appointing authority to report vacancies, in violation of the quota prescribed in the Special rules, read in the light of Note 3 to R5 of Part II of the KS & SSR, was an action in excess of jurisdiction and therefore, a nullity. The direct recruits cannot get seniority based on the date of advice, as they are advised in excess of their quota. They have to wait for their turn, to get seniority. The normal rule governing seniority in the General rules is not applicable to them, as their appointments were against the provisions of the Special rules. Whenever it is found a change in the date of promotion is warranted, that is carried out by assigning a different date in the seniority list. There need not necessarily be any separate appointment order.

Rule 27 (a) & (c)

      As per Rule 27(a) where the method of appointment to the post are by promotion and by direct recruitment in a fixed ratio, shall be determined as where the first vacancy in a category is for appointment by promotion and the second  vacancy is for appointment by direct recruitment and when the first two vacancies arise in that category a departmental hand shall be appointed regularly by promotion, as the case may be, in the first vacancy and in the absence of direct recruit reporting  for duty in the second vacancy a departmental hand shall be appointed temporarily by promotion, as the case may be, in that vacancy. In the case a direct recruit does not report for duty till a third vacancy arises in the department, the appointment of person temporarily by promotion in the second vacancy shall be regularized from the date of occurrence of third vacancy. Similarly if two more vacancies are in the cadre (total five) the departmental hands are entitled for three vacancies and hence the promotion of the third man shall be regularized from the date of occurrence of the fifth vacancy. The direct recruits shall be entitled for rank and seniority from the date of his first effective advice.

   Rule 27(a) and (c) only stipulates that while determining the seniority of direct recruits it should be based on the date of their effective advice and when two or more persons are included in the same advice list, their relative seniority list shall be fixed according to the order in which their names are arranged in the advice list. That will not prevent the KWA to place promotes in the date of occurrence of vacancies within quota rule. 

MISUSING THE JUDGMENT FOR REVERSION

As on the Judgment dated 12.01.2016 in W.P.(C) No. 31525 of 2015, the dispute regarding the seniority is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme court and the matter had pointed out in the counter affidavit filed by the KWA. The Hon’ble  Supreme Court had issued an interim order dated 10.04.2015 directing to maintain “Status quo” in the SLP (Civil) No. 11432-37 of 2015. As on the date of issuance of the said interim order on 10.04.2015, final seniority list as on 01.07.2012 and revised seniority list as on 01.01.2015 was in force. Therefore, the maintaining of status quo as on 10.04.2015 mean following the above mentioned two seniority lists for all practical purposes and not allowed any interference in the matter.

NOT MAINTAINED RATIO IN ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

From                    From                                                                                    

                               The General Secretary

KWA Engineering Staff Association

JNNURM Project Circle, Kochi 11.

To

          Smt. A. Shinamol IAS

The Managing Director

JALA BHAVAN,

Kerala Water Authority,

Thiruvananthapuram.

Sir,
Sub: Combined Seniority list of Assistant Exe. Engineer publishing -
         reg
Ref:   1) Judgment dated 27.09.17 in WP( C) No. 7123 of 2012 (M) 
          2) Judgment dated 31.12.2012 in WP © No. 19058 of 2012 (F)

3) No. KWA/JB/E2(A)/5130/2012/Vol.II dated 07.09.15,        

           15.09.15 and 29.01.16.

The Hon’ble High Court in its Judgment dated 27.09.17 in WP( C) No. 7123 of 2012 (M) had been directed the Kerala water Authority to maintain the cadre strength ratio in the post of Assistant Executive Engineer in the light of the Judgment in WA No. 353/2000 with retrospective effect from 05.01.2000, within a period of two months. It is pointed out that the cadre strength ratio of Assistant Executive Engineer is 216 and by working out the ratio of 3:1, 54 will have to be given to the Diploma holders and rest to the Degree holders. The photocopy of the Judgment is submitted herewith.

The Hon’ble High Court in its Judgment dated 31.12.2012 in WP © No. 19058 of 2012 (F) had also directed the KWA “to ensure the ratio of 3:1 facilitating occupation of the requisite number of posts by the Diploma holders in the post of Assistant Executive Engineer as well applying the ratio to the cadre strength. No post/vacancy coming within the quota earmarked for the Diploma holders shall be caused to be filled up even temporarily, by accommodating any Degree holder”. But the KWA was filled up the vacancies reserved for the Diploma holders violating the court orders by promoting the Degree holders through various promotion orders including vide reference 3^rd cited above on 07.09.15, 15.09.15 and 29.01.16 in the conditions that the consequent imbalance in ratio will be rectified in future by promoting the Diploma holders. Nobody promoted sofar as per these conditions.

In the above circumstances, I request that combined seniority list of Diploma and Degree holders of the Assistant Executive Engineer may please be published with retrospective effect from 05.01.2000 by reckoning the seniority in the date of occurrence of vacancies within quota rule and circulated among the incumbents including in the feeder categories in compliance of the above Judgments at the earliest.

                                                  Thanking you,

                                                                              Yours faithfully,

                                                  Sd/-

Ernakulam,                                                              SALIH. K.K.

09.11.2017

ATTEMPT FOR BACK DOOR APPOINTMENT ON MARCH 2018

NOT OBEYED

It is now settled law in view of the decision of the “Supreme Court in Prakash v. Kurien” reported in 1999 (2) KLT 710 that the ratio has to be applied as against the cadre strength. The official respondent has realized the mistake and it is undertaken in the counter affidavit that steps were being taken to rectify the mistake and the Hon’ble Court in its Judgment dated 18.10.2005 in O.P.No. 3750 of 1998 directed the respondents to follow the ratio strictly as against the cadre strength.

ജല അതോറിറ്റി സബ് ഡിവിഷൻ ഓഫീസ് സ്ഥാപിക്കുക

വിസ്തൃതി, ജനസാന്ദ്രത, ജോലിഭാരം, വാട്ടർ കണക്ഷനുകളുടെ എണ്ണം എന്നിവ കൊണ്ട് കേരളത്തിലെ ഏറ്റവും വലിയ സെക്ഷൻ ഓഫീസായ ഞാറയ്ക്കൽ ജല അതോറിറ്റി സെക്ഷനെ വിഭജിച്ചു രണ്ടു സെക്ഷനുകളാക്കുകയും വൈപ്പിൻകരയിൽ ജല അതോറിറ്റി സബ് ഡിവിഷൻ ഓഫീസ് സ്ഥാപിക്കുകയും ചെയ്യേണ്ടതാണ്. 6 പഞ്ചായത്ത് പ്രദേശങ്ങളിലും കൊച്ചി കോർപറേഷന്റെ ഒരു ഡിവിഷനിലുമായി 400 കിലോ മീറ്ററുകളോളം ദൈർഘ്യമുള്ള വിതരണ ശൃംഖലയിലൂടെ 39000 ത്തിൽപരം വാട്ടർ കണക്ഷനുകളും പബ്ലിക് ടാപ്പുകളുമാണ് ഈ സെക്ഷന്റെ പരിധിയിലുള്ളത്. ഫോർട്ട് വൈപ്പിൻ, എളംകുന്നപുഴ, ഞാറയ്ക്കൽ, നായരമ്പലം എന്നീ പ്രദേശങ്ങൾക്കായി നിലവിലുള്ള സെക്ഷൻ ഓഫീസും എടവനക്കാട്, കുഴുപ്പിള്ളി, പള്ളിപ്പുറം എന്നീ പ്രദേശങ്ങൾക്കായി പുതിയ സെക്ഷൻ ഓഫീസും ആരംഭിക്കാവുന്നതാണ്. എടവനക്കാട് ഉന്നത തല സംഭരണിയ്ക്ക് താഴെ സബ് ഡിവിഷൻ ഓഫീസും ഒരു സെക്ഷൻ ഓഫീസും ആരംഭി ക്കുന്നതിനുള്ള സൗകര്യമൊരുക്കാവുന്നതാണ്. ജിഡ ധനസഹായത്തോടെ വര്ഷങ്ങൾക്കുമുമ്പ് ഈ പ്രദേശത്തു ആരംഭിച്ച പദ്ധതികൾ ഇപ്പോഴും ലക്ഷ്യപ്രാപ്തിയിലെത്താത്തത് അന്വേഷണ വിധേയമാക്കേണ്ടതാണ്. പദ്ധതികളുടെ ഭാഗമായി 172 കിലോ മീറ്ററുകളോളം പുതിയ പൈപ്പ്ലൈനുകൾ പല ഭാഗത്തായി സ്ഥാപിച്ചിട്ടുണ്ടെങ്കിലും മേഖല തിരുച്ചു ശുദ്ധ ജലവിതരണം ചെയ്യാവുന്ന തരത്തിൽ ഉന്നത തല സംഭരണികളോ വിതരണ ശൃംഖലയോ പൂർത്തീകരിച്ചിട്ടില്ല. ഭൂ പ്രകൃതി കൊണ്ട് തെക്കുവടക്കായി കിടക്കുന്നപ്രദേശത്ത് മേഖല തിരിച്ചു തുല്യ വിതരണം ലക്ഷ്യം വെച്ചു കൊണ്ടാണ് പദ്ധതി ആരംഭിച്ചത്. എളംകുന്നപുഴ, ഞാറയ്ക്കൽ, നായരമ്പലം എന്നീ മേഖലകളിലെ ജോലികളാണ് പൂർത്തീകരിക്കേണ്ടത്. കാലതാമസത്തിനുള്ള കാരണങ്ങൾ വിലയിരുത്തി എത്രയുംവേഗം പദ്ധതികൾ പൂർത്തീകരിക്കേണ്ട താണ്. സമയബന്ധിതമായി ജോലികൾ പൂർത്തീകരിക്കുന്നതിനാണ് പെരുമ്പാവൂർ പ്രൊജക്റ്റ് ഡിവിഷന്റെ മേൽനോട്ടത്തിൽ പദ്ധതികളാരംഭിച്ചത്. എന്നാൽ ഇതേ കാലയളവിൽ മെയ്ന്റനൻസ് വിഭാഗത്തിന്റെ മേല്നോട്ടത്തിലാരംഭിച്ച എടവനക്കാട് കുഴുപ്പിള്ളി പദ്ധതികൾ സമയബന്ധിതമായി പൂർത്തീകരിക്കുവാൻ കഴിഞ്ഞു. എടവനക്കാട് കുഴുപ്പിള്ളി പദ്ധതികളിൽ നിന്നുള്ള വെള്ളം പൂർത്തീകരിക്കപ്പെടാത്ത മേഖലകളിലേക്ക് പ്രയോജനപ്പെടുത്തുന്നതു മൂലം നിലവിൽ മുഴുവൻ പ്രദേശത്തേയും തുല്യവിതരണ ലക്ഷ്യം അവതാളത്തിലായിരിക്കുകയാണ്. . പദ്ധതികളുടെ മേൽനോട്ട ചുമതല ഭൂമിശാസ്ത്രപരമായി ഏറ്റവും അടുത്തുള്ള ഓഫീസിൽ നിക്ഷിപ്‌തമാക്കുക, സെക്ഷൻ ഓഫീസുകളിൽ ആവശ്യത്തിന് ജീവനക്കാരെ നിയമിച്ചു ശാക്തീകരിക്കുക തുടങ്ങിയ ആവശ്യങ്ങളിലും എത്രയും വേഗം നടപടികൾ സ്വീകരിക്കണമെന്ന് അപേക്ഷിക്കുന്നു .

WELCOME TO Dr. A. Kowsigan IAS