The Departmental Promotion Committee has no power to review or revise a select list, except in the special circumstances mentioned in Rule 28(8) of the Kerala State and Subordinate Service Rules.

This writ petition is for the issue of a writ of certiorari quashing Ext.P-4 notification No. DC (1) 5-12316/ 74 dated 18-6 -1976 published in Part III of the Kerala Gazette dated 26 - 6 -1976. There is also a prayer for the issue of a writ of mandamus to the second respondent, the Board of Revenue, Kerala State, Trivandrum, to include the name of the petitioner also in the select list

Ext. P-4 assigning him proper rank among the Assistant Salestax Officers/Sales tax Inspectors.

2. The writ petitioner, while he was working as head clerk in the Revenue Department, was included by the Departmental Promotion Committee in the select list published on 2-3-1974 for appointment to the post of Assistant Salestax Officers for the year 1973-74. Thereafter, by Ext. P-2 order dated 14 - 3 -1974 he was provisionally promoted and posted as Assistant Salestax Officer. Ext. P-1 is the final select list published on 31-12 -1974 after obtaining the approval of the Government.

3. It is the publication of Ext. P-4 notification dated 18 - 6 -1976 in the Gazette dated 26 - 6 1976 that has given rise to the dispute in this matter and to the ultimate filing of this writ petition. It would appear that the Board of Revenue in the light of the decision of this Court in O.P. No. 4590 of 1972 felt the need for preparing fresh seniority list of the upper division clerks in the Revenue Department which necessarily was bound to have some changes in the ranking given previously. Because of this changed circumstances it would also appear that the Revenue Board felt it necessary that the select list for appointment to the post of Assistant Salestax Officers drawn up by the Departmental Promotion Committee for the year 1974-75 also should be reviewed. The Departmental Promotion Committee thereafter met and prepared select list for the appointment of Assistant Salestax Officers for the years 1967-68 to 1974-75. It is the admitted case that in the revised select list for the year 1973-74 or 1974-75 the petitioner's name was not included; though in both the years his name was included in the field of choice, he was not selected as the Departmental Promotion Committee found him to be unsustainable.

5. The counsel for the petitioner, Sri. Pirappancode V. Sreedharan Nair, submitted that the action of the Departmental Promotion Committee in reviewing the select list for the year 1973-74, which was published provisionally, and thereafter finally after the approval of the Government as early as 31-12 -1974, was not justified and was in effect without jurisdiction. The submission of the counsel is that the Kerala State and Subordinate Service Rules do not empower the Departmental Promotion Committee to review or revise a select list except in the special circumstances mentioned in Rule 28 (8) of the said Rules, and that such circumstances do not exist in the present case. It is also submitted that the failure on the part of the Government to exercise jurisdiction under Rule 29 of the Rules shows that it was without any direction from the Government or without the Government's approval that the Departmental Promotion Committee has proceeded to revise or review the select list already published finally with the approval of the Government On a careful consideration of the provisions contained in Rule 28 (8) of the Kerala State and Subordinate Service Rules I am of the view that except for the special circumstances mentioned in the said sub-rule there is no power for the Departmental Promotion Committee to review or revise the select list. When that is the position, the contingency of a person placed in the position as that of the writ petitioner being included in the field of choice for consideration again by the Departmental Promotion Committee also could not arise.

5. The Government Pleader appearing for the State submitted that the Departmental Promotion Committee must be presumed to have the right and the power to correct the mistake, if any, crept in the course o