JUDGMENT :

Shoba Annamma Eapen, J.

The above original petition is filed by the State challenging Ext.P4 order of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram dated 24.05.2022 in O.A.No.1322/2016 holding that the applicant is entitled to get her seniority in the cadre of Staff Nurse Grade-II reckoned with effect from 17.2.2003, the date of her advice for appointment.

2. The issue which arises for consideration in this original petition is whether the respondent, who secured a district-wise appointment, transferred to another district on request, under the Jawan quota, being a relative of military personnel, is entitled to protect her original seniority in the new unit reckoning from the date of advice by the Public Service Commission.

3. Brief facts of the case are as follows:

The respondent/applicant was selected and advised by the Public Service Commission on 17.02.2003 for appointment as Staff Nurse Grade- II in the Health Services Department and was posted to Government Medical College, Kozhikode and joined duty on 25.04.2003. While working in Kozhikode, the respondent submitted a request for transfer to Kottayam in the Military quota, because her sister Captain Rajani is in the Military service, who also requested the transfer of the respondent to Kottayam to take care of their parents. The request of the respondent for transfer to Kottayam was granted as per the order dated 26.02.2007.

4. When the seniority list of Staff Nurse Grade-II dated 03.01.2013 was published, the respondent was assigned Rank No. 74, and her seniority was reckoned with effect from 17.02.2003, the date of her advice by the Public Service Commission. However, when the revised seniority list was published in Annexure A1, the applicant's rank was revised as 2464, reckoning her seniority only with effect from 26.02.2007, the date on which she joined in Kottayam Medical College. The respondent's case is that since her transfer from Kozhikode to Kottayam was under the Jawan's quota, her seniority should not be forfeited and her rank should be determined based on the date of advice by the Public Service Commission. Though an appeal was filed, her request was rejected by the Government as per Annexure A5 Order dated 29.02.2016, stating that the Government had issued G.O.(P) No.36/91/P&ARD dated 02.12.1991, which reads that any inter-district transfer, except in case of candidates advised to Headquarters vacancies, would entail loss of seniority.

5. Aggrieved by the Annexure A5 Order, the respondent filed the Original Application before the Tribunal, contending that Annexure A9 G.O.(P) No.12/2004/P&ARD dated 10.09.2004 is the relevant G.O which was issued subsequent to G.O. (P) No.36/1991/P&ARD dated 02.12.1991. It was further contended before the Tribunal that in Clause 18 of Annexure A9 order, it was ordered that existing orders regarding transfer facilities available to employees belonging to SC/ST, physically handicapped employees, employees who have completed defence service, relative of jawan, wife of freedom fighter, or husband or son/daughter who look after the parents of freedom fighter, parents of mentally retarded children, and President or General Secretary of recognized service organization, will be followed. It was the contention of the respondent that there is specific reference to the earlier G.O.(Rt)No.2302/96/PD dated 01.09.1966, wherein the original seniority was protected in the case of relatives of Jawan on availing of inter-district transfer, in Annexure A9 Government Order. Therefore, the respondent is entitled to protect her seniority based on Annexure A9 Government Order G.O.(P) No.12/2004/P&ARD dated 10.09.2004.

6. We have heard the learned senior Government Pleader and the learned counsel for the respondent.

7. The learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the petitioners- State and the Director of Medical Education ave