IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, MR.JUSTICE P. KRISHNA KUMAR, JJ
The State Of Kerala – Appellant
Versus
Dr. Chitra. S, W/o. Dr Jyothish Hari – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
P.Krishna Kumar, J.
The key issue in these cases is whether Assistant Surgeons appointed under the Kerala Health Service (Medical Officers) Special Rules, 2010 (‘Special Rules, for short) who have exercised the option for placement in the Speciality Cadre can later relinquish their right to such an appointment under Rule 38 of Part II of Kerala State & Subordinate Service Rules (‘KS&SSR’).
2. The petitioners are Assistant Surgeons in the Kerala State Health Service. Both petitioners opted for placement in the Speciality Cadre in 2013. However, in 2024, they submitted a request to relinquish their right to such an appointment in the Speciality Cadre, citing personal inconveniences. The Government rejected their request for relinquishment (the request made by one of them was not acted upon by the Government) on the ground that Rule 6 of the Special Rules prohibits it. The Government further proceeded to post them in the Speciality Cadre. Aggrieved by this decision, the petitioners approached the Kerala Administrative Tribunal. Through the impugned common order, the Tribunal found that the petitioners are entitled to relinquish the option exercised by them as per the provision
The court held that the Special Rules prohibit relinquishment of the option for placement in the Speciality Cadre once exercised, prevailing over general provisions in KS&SSR.
The irrevocable nature of options under the Special Rules must be upheld, allowing placement in the Speciality Cadre after acquiring additional qualifications as per specified conditions.
Seniority of Police Constables must be determined by the date of first effective advice by the Public Service Commission, overriding integration orders, and relinquishment of rights must be in writin....
Rule 28 of the A.P. State & Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 does not permanently extinguish an employee's right to be considered for promotion, in line with fundamental rights under Article 16(1) of ....
(1) Promotion – Once a person joins as an Assistant Engineer, i.e. feeder post under a separate service governed by Special Rules, 1960, then that person irrespective of how he/she has been appointed....
Since statutory rules regulating Government service were only adopted on basis of a resolution by Board of Kerala Water Authority, said rules do not retain statutory flavour in their application to s....
The authority for vacancy appointments must follow valid ranked lists; vacancies from Leave Preparatory to Retirement are not substantive until actual retirement occurs, impacting recruitment legalit....
High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 does not extend to appellate review; qualifications for civil service maintained under established rules.
The main legal point established is that Rule 38 of Part II KS & SSR does not restrict the period of relinquishment, and the Government Order does not limit the period of temporary relinquishment to ....
Court ruled that dismissal of petitioner's application without considering vital documents regarding post equivalency and qualifications was improper, necessitating a reassessment of the case.
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.