Indian Bank vs a.Premkumar

Indian Bank vs A.Premkumar

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jul 30, 2019

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1855808

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1855808
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Smt. Justice P.V.Asha
Decided On: Jul 30, 2019
Case Number: RP/109/2019

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Indian Bank

Respondent

A.Premkumar

Excerpt

.....(bm), indian bank, pirayiri branch, palakkad district-678 001. by adv. sri.s.sujin this review petition having come up for admission on 30.07.2019, the court on the same day passed the following: . .judgmentthe review petition is filed by the respondents in the writ petition pointing out that the direction to grant promotion to writ petition in preference to his juniors is liable to be reviewed as promotion from the post of branch manager that is from scale 3 to scale 4 depends upon various factors including apar, his performance in written test, interview etc. it is also pointed out that by regularisation of the period of absence alone writ petitioner cannot be granted promotion as seniority alone is not the relevant criteria for consideration of petitioner's claim for promotion.2. the respondent in the review petition has filedcounter affidavit producing ext.r1(a) and claiming that he is entitled to be promoted with effect from 2013. the learned counsel for the writ petitioner/respondent submits that the respondent was not granted promotion only because of the pendency of the writ petition or :3: otherwise he would have got promotion as early as in2013. the writ petitioner also relies on ext.r1(a), according to which promotion has to be made on the basis of seniority.3. the learned counsel for the review petitioners points out that ext.r1(a) was issued only in 2019 and that was not an issue which arose for consideration in the writ petition. in the above circumstances, i am of the view that the claim of the respondent in the review petition for promotion on the basis of ext.r1(a) can be agitated by the respondent separately. the review petition is disposed of with the above clarification. sd/- p.v.asha judge rkc

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 8TH SRAVANA, 1941 RP.No.109 of 2019 IN WP(C). 34069/2015 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 34069/2015 of HIGHCOURT REVIEW PETITIONER-RESPONDENTS:
1 INDIAN BANK CORPORATE OFFICE, 254-260, AVVAI SHANMUGHAM SALAI, ROYALPETTAH, CHENNAI-600 014, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2 THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR INDIAN BANK, HEAD OFFICE, 254-260, AVVAI SHANMUGHAM SALAI, ROYAL PETTAH, CHENNAI-600 014. 3 THE GENERAL MANAGER (HRM) INDIAN BANK, CORPORATE OFFICE, 254-260, AVVAI SHAMMUGHAM SALAI, ROYALPETTAH, CHENNAKI-600 014. 4 THE ZONAL MANAGER INDIAN BANK, ZONAL OFFICE, RAM MEENA BUILDING, VALANJAMBALAM JUNCTION, S.A.ROAD, KOCHI-682 016. BY ADV. SRI.S.EASWARAN
RESPONDENT/S: A.PREMKUMAR SENIOR MANAGAR (BM), INDIAN BANK, PIRAYIRI BRANCH, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 001. BY ADV. SRI.S.SUJIN THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: . .

JUDGMENT

The Review Petition is filed by the respondents in the Writ Petition pointing out that the direction to grant promotion to writ petition in preference to his juniors is liable to be reviewed as promotion from the post of Branch Manager that is from scale 3 to scale 4 depends upon various factors including APAR, his performance in written test, interview etc. It is also pointed out that by regularisation of the period of absence alone writ petitioner cannot be granted promotion as seniority alone is not the relevant criteria for consideration of petitioner's claim for promotion.

2. The respondent in the Review Petition has filed

counter affidavit producing Ext.R1(a) and claiming that he is entitled to be promoted with effect from 2013. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner/respondent submits that the respondent was not granted promotion only because of the pendency of the Writ Petition or :3: otherwise he would have got promotion as early as in

2013. The writ petitioner also relies on Ext.R1(a), according to which promotion has to be made on the basis of seniority.

3. The learned counsel for the review petitioners points out that Ext.R1(a) was issued only in 2019 and that was not an issue which arose for consideration in the Writ Petition. In the above circumstances, I am of the view that the claim of the respondent in the review petition for promotion on the basis of Ext.R1(a) can be agitated by the respondent separately. The Review Petition is disposed of with the above clarification. Sd/- P.V.ASHA JUDGE rkc

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2019 Same Parties Indian Bank vs A.Premkumar Same Judge Honourable Smt. Justice P.V.Asha