IMPORTANT POINTS
The classification should be based on an intelligible differentia and the differentia in question must have a reasonable relation to the object sought to be achieved by the rule or statutory provision in question. The first argument of the petitioners is that though classification of departments specified under Schedule I is justified under Stream 2, there should not be a further classification from among the departments specified under Schedule I and exclude the teachers having gazetted rank and above from being part of Stream 3.

JUDGMENT :

Shaffique, J.

These Original petitions arise from a common order dated 14/2/2020 in OA (EKM) No. 23/2020 and connected cases.

2. The applicants before the Kerala Administrative Tribunal are employees of the Legislature Secretariat, Kerala Public Service Commission (KPSC), Advocate General’s Office, Teachers of Higher Secondary School (HSST) and an employee of a Public Sector Undertaking. They have approached the Tribunal seeking a direction that they should also be permitted to participate in the selection being conducted to the cadre of Kerala Administrative Service (for short 'KAS').

3. The Kerala Administrative Service (KAS) Rules, 2018, (hereinafter referred as the ‘2018 Rules’) framed under the Kerala Public Services Act, 1968, created the cadre of KAS. The strength at the entry level in the KAS was limited to 10% of the sanctioned strength of second gazetted post in the departments and equivalent post in the common categories of posts in the departments as specified in Schedule I to the 2018 Rules. There are three streams of selection, all by way of direct recruitment. Stream 1 is from qualified persons between the age of 21 years and 32 as on 1st January of the year in which the applications are invited. Stream 2 is from among full members or approved probationers in any Government Departments excluding gazetted officers from the departments mentioned in Schedule I. The age limit for applying is between 21 years and 40 years. Stream 3 is from among persons who were first gazetted officers or above in the departments mentioned in Schedule 1, and not above 50 years of age as on 1st January of the year in which the applications are invited. Item (3) in column 3 of Stream 3, further indicates the candidate 'must have satisfactorily completed probation in any cadre in Government or probation has not been declared in the current post even after the period of probation due to administrative delay, but against whom no major penalty has been imposed or proceedings for a major penalty or criminal proceedings is in progress'.

4. OP (KAT) No.71/2020 which arises from OA (EKM) No.23/2020 has been filed by an employee of Advocate General's office. He applied under Stream 1 and 2. The application under Stream 2 has been rejected stating that employees of constitutional bodies had been excluded from the purview of Stream 2. OP(KAT) No.83/2020 arises from OA(EKM) No.97/2020 and OP(KAT) No.80/2020 arises from OA (EKM)No.78/2020. They are also employees of Advocate General's office. Their applications were rejected on the ground that they are employees of constitutional bodies.

5. OP(KAT) No.75/2020 arises from OA No.2567/2019 and OP(KAT) No.76/2020 arises from OA No. 187/2020. The applicants were employees of the Legislature Secretariat. They applied under Stream 2 and their applications were rejected stating that they are employees of a constitutional body. OP(KAT) No.77/2020 arises from OA No.188/2020. The applicants were employees of Legislature Secretariat and applied under Stream 3. Their application has been rejected on the ground that they do not form part of any Government department. According to them, they were originally appointed in the Legislature Secretariat as Assistants and their probation was declared in the said cadre. Presently, petitioners 1 to 3 are working as Block Panchayat Secretaries and 4th petitioner as Sales Tax Officer. They applied under Stream 3 which came to be rejected by stating that their probation was not declared in any cadre of Government department.

6. OP(KAT) No.109/2020 arises from OA No.2417/2019. The applicant was working as Section Officer of Public Service Commission. He applied under Stream 3 which came to be rejected since Public Service Commission was not included in Schedule I of the Rules. OP(KAT) No.78/2020 arises from OA No.149/2020 and OP(KAT) No. 106/2020 arises from OA No.198/2020. They are employees of KPSC. Their applications under Stream 2 were rejected on the ground that they