BHASKARAN NAMBIAR, MALIMATH
HARIDASAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
1. Training may be a qualification prescribed for appointment; training may be a requirement demanded after appointment. Dass the period of training affect the question of seniority under the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules (KS & SSR for short)? This, therefore, is the question posed for consideration in this Writ Appeal.
2. The Writ Appellants, Diploma holders in Engineering, were advised by the Public Service Commission for appointment as Instructor Grade II on 8th August, 1966. Both of them joined duty in October 1966. Respondents 3 and 4 did not apply for the post of Instructors, but applied, pursuant to a different notification for the post of Instructor Trainees. The notification stated that the applications were invited 'for selection for training and subsequent appointment' as Instructors. They were selected as trainees and advised for training in July 1966 and were subsequently appointed as Instructor Grade II only in August 1968, about two years after the appellants were appointed. Respondents 3 and 4, however, have been assigned ranks 621 and 599. given seniority over the appellants who have been given ranks 629 and 635. Contending that they are en
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.