Back
Judges : V.SIVARAMAN NAIR
PYLO - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA - Respondent
Case No : O.P. No. 8652,10575 of 1984
Decided On : 07/10/1985
Advocates Appeared :
Joseph A. Vadakkel; For Petitioners T.P. Kelu Nambiar; Government Pleader; For Respondents
Public Service Commission - Last Grade Servants - Rules of Procedure - R.13 of the Rules of Procedure - The court discussed the validity of R.13 of the Rules of Procedure of the Kerala Public Service Commission, which allowed the Commission to reduce the validity of a ranked list by publishing a new list soon after the one-year period is over. The court held that the Rules of Procedure are within the competence of the Public Service Commission as incidental and ancillary to the powers and functions entrusted with it under Art.320 of the Constitution of India. The court also emphasized that the rules should not run counter to the provisions of the existing law and should eliminate arbitrariness. The court further held that the constitutional mandates contained in Art.14 and 16 provide sufficient guidelines for the exercise of the power under R.13. The court also discussed the cancellation of the ranked list and the necessity of bringing into force a fresh ranked list before the expiry of the three-year period, emphasizing the need to give fair opportunity to all candidates seeking public employment. The court directed the Public Service Commission to treat the existing ranked list as valid until the completion of the three-year period of its validity and to make the ranked list prepared pursuant to the new notification operative only after that period.
Fact of the Case:
The 17 petitioners applied for the posts of Last Grade Servants in Alleppey District. The Public Service Commission issued a notification for the appointment, and the petitioners were included in the ranked list. However, before the expiry of the minimum period of validity of the ranked list, the Commission issued a fresh notification inviting applications for appointment, resulting in the cancellation of the existing ranked list. The petitioners contended that the cancellation of the ranked list was arbitrary and discriminatory, and it deprived them of the opportunity for public employment.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Rules of Procedure of the Public Service Commission, including R.13, were within the competence of the Commission and did not run counter to the provisions of the existing law. The court emphasized the need to eliminate arbitrariness and provide fair opportunities for all candidates seeking public employment. The court directed the Commission to treat the existing ranked list as valid until the completion of the three-year period of its validity and to make the new ranked list operative only after that period.
Issues: The issues involved the validity of R.13 of the Rules of Procedure of the Kerala Public Service Commission, the cancellation of the existing ranked list, and the denial of fair opportunity for the petitioners to be considered for public employment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Rules of Procedure of the Public Service Commission were within the competence of the Commission and should not run counter to the provisions of the existing law. The court emphasized the need to eliminate arbitrariness and provide fair opportunities for all candidates seeking public employment. The court directed the Commission to treat the existing ranked list as valid until the completion of the three-year period of its validity and to make the new ranked list operative only after that period.
Final Decision: The court allowed the original petition and directed the Public Service Commission to treat the existing ranked list as valid until the completion of the three-year period of its validity and to make the new ranked list operative only after that period. There was no order as to costs.
1. The 17 petitioners were applicants for appointment to posts of Last Grade Servants in Alleppey District. They had applied pursuant to the notification issued by the Kerala Public Service Commission and published in Kerala Gazette dated 15-12-1981. They were included in the ranked list published on 5-3-1983 with rank Nos. between 166 and 473.8 of the petitioners in O. P. No. 8652 of 1984 and 2 petitioners in O. P. No. 10575 of 1984 belong to non-reservation communities. From these categories persons holding rank up to 128 were advised for appointment. 4 petitioners in the former and 3 candidates in the latter Original Petition belong to Ezhava and Muslim communities which are entitled to the benefits of reservation in the matter of employment. Candidates with ranks upto 142 and 170 were advised from these communities. All the petitioners are ranked lower down, the earliest with rank 166 and the last with rank 473 in the ranked list. According to R.13 of the Rules of Procedure of the Kerala Public Service Commission, the minimum period of validity of a ranked list is one year provided that the said list will continue in force till publication of a new list after the expiry of the minimum period of one year or till the expiry of two years whichever is earlier. The maximum period of validity was extended from two to three years by a recent amendment to R.13 of the Rules of Procedure, but the minimum period is still retained as one year, with the result that the Public Service Commission can reduce the validity of the ranked list by publication of a new list soon after the one year period is over.
2. The petitioners submit that even before the expiry of the minimum period of validity of Ext. PI ranked list the Public Service Commission issued afresh notification Ext. P2 dated 3-5-1983 inviting applications for appointment to last grade service in Alleppey District. It is the petitioner's case that there were many vacancies in last grade service in Alleppey District. which could have been filled up by appointment of candidates included in the ranked list; but no steps were taken by the concerned departments to fill up those vacancies. The invitation of applications for appointment afresh resulting in cancellation of Ext. P1 list is said to be arbitrary and discriminatory in these circumstances. According to the petitioners, there was no reason why candidates like the petitioners should be refused appointment by cancellation of the ranked list, Ext. P1, before the expiry of the three years period on 4-3-1986.
3. The petitioners contend that R.13 of the Rules of Procedure is beyond the competence of the Public Service Commission, since legislative power in respect of Public Service rests only with the State and not with the Public Service Commission in view of entry 4' of list II of the VIIth Schedule of the Constitution of India. It is also submitted that assuming R.13 is within the competence of the Public Service Commission, that rule is invalid as conferring an arbitrary power on the Commission to publish a new list so as to reduce the period of validity of an earlier ranked list resulting in denial of employment to selected candidates included in the former ranked list. The consequence of such arbitrariness is sought to be illustrated by a reference to Ext. P3, whereby the application of one of the candidates included in Ext. P1 ranked list was rejected by the Public Service Commission as he was over-aged. The petitioners contend that but for the arbitrary decision of the Public Service Commission to publish a new list, the petitioners would have got a fair opportunity to be appointed against vacancies arising within the three year period upto 4-3-1986. They submit that there were existing vacancies-37 in the courts, 50 vacancies of Lascars in the Mechanical Division of PW. Department, 60 vacancies in Education Department, 2 posts each in Stationery and Water Transport Departments, 17 vacancies in Land Revenue Depart
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
