IMPORTANT POINTS:
The recruitment was already over-Out of the 15 candidates recruited, one did not join duty and this vacancy has to be treated as a non joining duty vacancy and therefore it is not a fresh vacancy- The ban order would have little impact on the two candidates having rank Nos.14 and 15 had they joined duty in the normal course and the vacancies resultant on their refusal are not to be treated as fresh ones.

Chitambaresh, J.

The recruitment is to the post of Laboratory Technical Assistant -Agriculture (Nursery Management and Oriental Gardening) in the Kerala Vocational Higher Secondary Education Department. The candidate having rank No.14 in the ranked list published by the Kerala Public Service Commission did not join duty as she got employment in the Agriculture Department. The candidate having rank No.15 also did not join duty as he had relinquished his claim for appointment in the requisite proforma which was accepted by the Kerala Public Service Commission.

2. The State Government at that point of time halted filling up of further vacancies till the implementation of the National Skill Qualification Frame Work in the Vocational Higher Secondary Schools. The ban order of the State can operate only in regard to filling up of future vacancies and not to the vacancies to which the candidates have already been advised for appointment. The order dated 09.05.2018 of the Education Department intimating the ban comes long after 19.03.2018 and 10.04.2018 which were the dates of reporting of vacancies and advise.

3. The following observations in Indian Bank v. Jayasree [1998 (2) KLT 464 (DB)] is apposite:

“It is not a question of any appointment of an existing vacancy or appointment in a fresh

vacancy. Therefore, in our opinion the restrictions imposed by the Reserve Bank of India will not apply to the case on hand. In this case, the recruitment was already over. Out of

the 15 candidates recruited, one did not join duty and this vacancy has to be treated as a non

joining duty vacancy and therefore it is not a fresh vacancy.” (emphasis supplied) The ban order would have little impact on the two candidates having rank Nos.14 and 15 had they joined duty in the normal course and the vacancies resultant on their refusal are not to be treated as fresh ones.

4. The petitioner who holds rank No.16 in the ranked list published by the Kerala Public Service Commission is the next eligible candidate to be advised for appointment to the vacancies. The Kerala Administrative Tribunal was not justified in observing that the policy of the State Government to keep in abeyance the selection process cannot be interfered with. We set aside the impugned order of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal and direct the respondents to complete the process of appointment for vacancies that arose before 09.05.2018.

The original petition is allowed. No costs.