Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, apart from perusing the record. Since the issue lies in a narrow compass, this Court proposes to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage itself. 2. Briefly stated, the petitioner was appointed as Driver Grade II on 20th July 2000 in the respondent Corporation as per the advice of the Public Service Commission. Later, he was promoted as Driver Grade I with effect from 20th July 2009. It is the contention of the petitioner that as he belongs to Ezhava Community, he produced a non-creamy layer certificate issued by the Tahasildar of the Taluk concerned at the time of his admission. In fact, on the basis of said certificate, Ext.P2 rank list has come to be published showing petitioner's name at Sl.No.23 with Rank No.3455.
W.P.(C) No.27133 of 2014 2
3. When gradation list of drivers was prepared and published, the petitioner's name was kept below his juniors on the ground that the petitioner did not produce Non-Creamy Layer certificate. In that context the petitioner filed Ext.P8 representation before the 2nd respondent.
4. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued on the undesirability of the action on the part of the respondents in placing the petitioner below in rank in the gradation list, despite his objections earlier, on a mere premise that he did not produce the Non-Creamy Layer Certificate, which in fact was produced at the earliest point of time, he has eventually submitted that the authorities may consider the petitioner's Ext.P8 representation in accordance with law.
5. In the facts and circumstances, having regard to the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, without entering into the merits of the matter, this Court disposes of the present writ petition with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P8 representation of the petitioner in accordance W.P.(C) No.27133 of 2014 3 with law and pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible,at any rate, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JUDGE
sj