The exclusion from service based on character and antecedents does not offend Art.16 of the Constitution. The maximum protection must be given to each interest with the minimum sacrifice of the opposing interest.

1. This is an application for the issue of the appropriate writ to call for the records leading to Ext. P. 4 order and for quashing the same. The petitioner P. Kunhikrishnan Nair was a Panchayat Assistant of the

Naripetta Panchayat. He had applied for appointment as a Panchayat Executive Officer, and the Deputy Director of Panchayats, Kozikode, by his order dated 3 21962, a copy of which is produced and marked as Ext. P.1, appointed the petitioner provisionally to the post of Panchayat Executive Officer of Kunnummal Panchayat. The relevant portion of Ext. P.1 order is as follows:

"The candidate is specially informed that the appointment now made is purely temporary and it will not confer on him any right or claim for continuance or future appointment in Government service but he will be entitled only to the emoluments attached to the post and he will be reverted to his original post in case he is not selected by the Kerala Public Service Commission."

The petitioner was subsequently selected by the Public Service Commission for appointment as Panchayat Executive Officer. Thereafter the petitioner was served with an order, copy of which is marked as Ext. P.4. Ext. P. 4 reads:

"Sarvasri P. Kunhikrishnan Nair and K. Narayanan Nambiar who have been provisionally selected and posted as Executive Officers of Kunnummal and Muzhakunnu Panchayats respectively under R.9(a) (1) of Kerala State Subordinate Services (General) Rules in this office proceedings cited are reverted and posted to their original posts as Panchayat Assistants of Naripetta and Mattannur Panchayats respectively with immediate effect.

Sri. P. Kunhikrishnan Nair and Sri. K. Narayanan Nambiar will hand over charge of their respective offices to the Panchayat Inspectors concerned and pet themselves relieved and proceed to their new stations forthwith. The Panchayat Inspectors concerned will take charge the office of Executive Officers of Kunnummal and Muzhakunnu Panchayats from Sri. P. Kunhikrishnan Nair and K. Narayanan Nambiar respectively and relieve them immediately.

The District Panchayat Officers concerned will take immediate action to revert or oust as the case may be the incumbents now working as Panchayat Assistants in Naripetta and Mattannur Panchayats respectively and intimate the fact to this office.

The Panchayat Inspectors and Executive Officers concerned will take immediate action to give effect to this order".

The petitioner complains that Ext. P4 order amounts to a reduction of his rank and was passed in violation of the provisions of Art.311 of the Constitution. He also urged that Ext. P. 4 order is discriminatory, and violates Art.16 of the Constitution.

2. The State has filed a counter affidavit containing the following averments: The petitioner's appointment to the post of the Panchayat Executive Officer was purely provisional, that the appointment to the post of Panchayat Executive Officer is governed by the Kerala State and Subordinate Service Rules, that in order that the petitioner may be eligible for appointment to that post, the character and antecedents of the candidate must be acceptable to the appointing authority, that on verification through the routine channel as in the case of every other prospective candidate recommended by the Public Service Commission for appointment to the Government Service, the petitioner's character and antecedents were found to be not acceptable to the Government, that his reversion to the post of Panchayat Assistant under the Panchayat Establishment raised no justiciable issue and that he had no seniority or rank above the other candidates mentioned in his petition.

3. It was argued for the petitioner that although Ext. P. 4 order would in itself appear to be innocuous, its real effect was to cast a stigma on the petitioner as the real reason for the termination of his service as Panchayat Executive Officer was that his character and antecedents were not satisfactory. It may be noted that the basis of this ar