IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J.
Fehmida Fatima S, W/o.Nithin A.N – Appellant
Versus
Kerala State Electricity Board Limited – Respondent
WP(C) No. 11474 of 2023
Decided on : 22-11-2023
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought writs to quash unjust reporting decisions and mandamus orders directing the reporting and appointment of vacancies for Assistant Engineer (Civil) positions in the Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.Finding of the Court:
The court found that the decision not to report vacancies was based on bona fide reasons related to ongoing restructuring and environmental challenges. It held that candidates do not have an automatic right to be appointed from a ranked list unless there are strong and cogent materials showing arbitrary actions by the state authorities. ISSUES Non-reporting of 36 Assistant Engineer (Civil) vacancies, validity of ranked list, compliance with interim order, and adherence to quota rules.Ratio Decidendi:
Candidates do not possess an indefeasible right to be appointed even if vacancies exist; appointing authorities may decide not to fill vacancies for valid reasons; judicial remedies can be sought if state authorities' actions are found arbitrary or unreasonable. FINAL DECISION The petition was dismissed as the court found that the respondents' justifications for not reporting vacancies were bona fide and reasonable. The prayer sought by the petitioners was denied.JUDGMENT :
The petitioners herein have been included in the ranked list for the Assistant Engineer (Civil) post in the Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd (‘KSEBL’ for brevity). Their grievance is that despite the availability of substantial vacancies in the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) in KSEBL, those vacancies are not reported to the PSC by the 1st respondent on the ground that restructuring measures are being initiated in the company.
2. Brief facts that need to be stated to resolve the issues raised in this writ petition are as follows:
a) The petitioners have been included in Ext. P1 rank list in the main list. The aforesaid rank list is stated to expire on 02.12.2023, as is evident from Ext.P2. It is stated that from Ext.P4 information obtained under the Right to Information Act, there are a total number of 330 sanctioned posts as on 01.02.2023 for the post of AE (Civil) in KSEBL, out of which 115 posts are occupied and 215 posts are vacant. The cadre strength of 330 is distributed in the ratio 4:1:3:2; 40% Degree quota (Open market), 10% in service quota (Degree), 30% Diploma quota, and 20% ITI quota. Accordingly, there would be 132 sanctioned posts in the category of AE (Civil), which are to be filled by recruitment from the open market by the 4th respondent.
b) According to the petitioners, Ext.P6 has been issued by the KSEBL for reporting vacancies of AE (Civil) under 40% direct recruitment quota and 10% in service quota. Relying on Ext.P6, it is contended that 131 is the cadre strength for the 40% direct recruitment quota. The petitioners assert that there are 36 vacancies out of 131 sanctioned posts, which are not reported by the 1st respondent. The reasons stated in Ext.P8 issued by the Chief Engineer, HR Management is that extensive restructuring measures are being carried out in all departments, including the civil department.
c) The petitioners assert that orders have been issued for promotion to the cadre of AE (Civil) in the 30% Diploma quota, 20% in the ITI quota, and 75% in the Graduate quota.
d) It is further contended that the Government has issued Ext.P14 Circular ordering the 1st respondent to report the anticipated vacancies. Their grievance is that Ext. P14 Circular is not being complied with by the KSEBL.
e) Pursuant to Ext. P14, the Power (A) Department had directed the KSEBL to report all anticipated vacancies in 2023 to the 4th respondent and also to make information on vacancies available to the Government. However, the KSEBL did not comply with the directions.
f) The petitioners assert that highlighting their grievances, Ext.P18 representation was submitted before the 3rd respondent. However, no action has been taken. It is in the afore circumstances that this Writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
(ii) To issue a writ of mandamus directing the 1s respondent to report all the substantive vacancies including the 36 vacancies in the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) in the Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd to the 4" respondent, before the expiry of Exhibit P1 ranked list;
(iii) To issue a writ of mandamus directing the 4th respondent to issue advise memos to all the 36 vacancies from Exhibit P1 ranked list for the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) in the Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd;
(iv) To issue a writ of mandamus directing the 1s respondent to issue appointment orders to the petitioners to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) in the Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd;
3. A counter affidavit has been filed by respondents 1 to 3, wherein it is stated that the cadre strength of Assistant Engineer (Civil) was established in the year 2006 as part of the restructuring initiative at that time. Significant changes have occurred in the power generation landscape within the State, primarily due to growing concerns surrounding environmental impacts. Consequently, new projects in this sect
Arshitha P and Others v State of Kerala
Kerala Public Service Commission v. Sheejamol
Candidates do not possess an indefeasible right to be appointed from a ranked list unless state authorities' actions are found arbitrary or unreasonable.
The decision not to recruit new personnel until an extensive restructuring is done was found to be non-arbitrary and reasonable.
The decision to not fill vacancies by KSEB was upheld as legitimate based on ongoing restructuring, emphasizing that candidates have no vested right to appointments from ranked lists under Article 22....
Non-cadre posts cannot be reported to the Public Service Commission; rank holders are entitled only to regular cadre posts, not to vacancies arising from non-cadre classifications.
Point of Law : Recruitment over and above notified vacancies is not in accordance with constitutional mandate of equal opportunity of unemployment, envisaged in Articles 14 and 16 of Constitution of ....
State or any public agency, cannot be precluded from challenging a judgment on the ground that it approaches this court, filing an appeal against only one party – Even if in that case, normative basi....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of equal opportunity for public employment and the interpretation of selection rules in the context of ongoing and continuous re....
The court reinforced that candidates cannot compel filling vacancies from expired ranked lists, affirming appointing authorities' discretion over vacancy reporting under government policy.
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 practi....
Appointments cannot be mandated if the appointing authority has valid reasons to not fill positions, even after directions, and must adhere to administrative regulations regarding vacancies.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.