Important points:
Daily wage persons and provisional persons are being engaged by the respondent-Department of Social Justice, as drivers to cater to their travel requirements and that the said practice is illegal and would amount to violating the directives issued by the Union Government as per Annexure R4(a) and Annexure R4(b), since the stand that the so called vacancies in question stand abolished etc.

JUDGMENT :

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

1. The prayers in the afore-captioned Original Petition filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, are as follows: (See Page No. 5 of the paper book of this Original Petition):

“(i) To call for the records leading to Exhibit P1 order of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 686 of 2015, set aside the same and allow the O.A. as prayed for.

(ii) To issue such other orders or directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem it fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. Heard Sri. P. Nandakumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in the OP/applicants 3 to 5, 7, 10 and 12 in the OA, Sri. P.C. Sasidharan, the learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala Public Service Commission (PSC) appearing for respondents 1 and 2 herein, Sri. B. Vinod, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for respondents 3 to 15, contesting respondents 16 to 21 in this Original Petition are original applicants in the O.A. other than the petitioners herein and who have already obtained advice. In view of the said submission that the said contesting respondents in the OP have already secured advice or appointments and as there is no conflicting interest in this OP and the said contesting respondents in the OP, as all of them had jointly prosecuted the application as joint applicants, notices to contesting respondents 16 to 21 will sand dispensed with.

3. The case of the petitioners herein is that they have been duly included in Annexure A1 rank list dated 05.01.2011 for the post of Driver Grade II (Light Duty Vehicle - LDV) for various departments in Alappuzha District pursuant to the selection notification issued in that regard by the respondent-PSC and further that the said rank list has expired on 20.06.2015. The further case of the petitioners in the O.P is to the effect that based on the interim order dated 05.06.2015 rendered by the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram Bench in the instant O.A. No. 686 of 2015, 8 vacancies in the post of Driver (LDV) under the Department-Directorate of Social Justice, under R4 and R5 herein, were in fact reported by them to the PSC on 16.06.2015, which is before the expiry of the rank list on 20.06.2015. It is further that the 4th respondent-Directorate of Social Justice has filed Ext.P5 reply statement dated 03.07.2015 before the Tribunal, in the said O.A. wherein it has been admitted that there are 14 sanctioned posts of Driver in the Alappuzha District under the Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS), functioning under the said Department of Social Justice and as against such 14 sanctioned posts, 6 persons are working now and the balance vacancies as against the sanctioned post is 8, the limited attempt made by the petitioners herein is to the effect that though the main O.A. dealt with by the Tribunal is in relation to the selection of appointment of candidates included in Annexure A1 rank list as against the vacancies in various departments, the focus in this case is mainly in respect of the alleged vacancies under the Department of Social Justice, and that no pleas are made as against the other departments for the reason that none of them had reported vacancies during the pendency of the O.A. before the expiry of the rank list. Hence, the petitioners in the O.P. would contend that the limited plea is only in relation to the 6 alleged vacancies said to be in existence and that 8 vacancies were in fact provisionally reported by the respondent-Director of Social Justice to the PSC well before the expiry of Annexure A1 rank list on 20.06.2015 and that the crucial aspect of the matter has not been taken into consideration while rendering impugned Ext.P1 final order dated 04.10.2019 in the instant O.A. No. 686 of 2015 and that therefore the verdict of the Tribunal to that limited extent would call for interdiction in the hands of this Court in respect of the 8 alleged vacancies said to have been in existence and actually reported