IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, MR.JUSTICE P. KRISHNA KUMAR, JJ
State Of Kerala, Represented By Its Secretary, General Administration Department, Secretariat – Appellant
Versus
Jayesh K. S/o E.P Krishnan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
P.Krishna Kumar, J.
The candidates included in the rank list for appointment in the Kerala Administrative Service (KAS) Junior Time Scale (Trainees) approached the Kerala Administrative Tribunal inter alia challenging Annexure A3 Government Order dated 06.02.2021 by which the cadre strength of KAS Officers (Junior Time Scale) was fixed at 105 by the Government. According to the candidates, the fixation of the cadre strength at 105 is in violation of the Kerala Administrative Service (KAS) Rules, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the KAS Rules’) and the actual figure is much higher.
2. By the impugned common order dated 13.10.2013, the Tribunal directed the Government to redetermine the cadre strength as on 01.10.2022 in accordance with the provisions contained in Rule 4 read with Rule 18 of the KAS Rules. The Tribunal further directed that the Government shall take steps to make appointments for the remaining vacancies as against the vacancies already reported to the Public Service Commission (PSC) pursuant to the interim direction of the Tribunal. Later, the Tribunal disposed of certain other similar applications based on the said impugned order. The above original petitio
The appointing authority has discretion to not fill vacancies for valid reasons, even with a valid rank list, and must comply with statutory rules for cadre strength fixation.
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....
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 autonomy and independence of Public Service Commissions in the selection process, and the authority of the Government to make recommendations to KPSC without binding KPSC to accept such recommend....
Candidates do not possess an indefeasible right to be appointed from a ranked list unless state authorities' actions are found arbitrary or unreasonable.
The autonomy of the KPSC in recruitment processes is upheld, but it must consider the Government's binding recommendations regarding vacancies, ensuring fair and transparent public employment.
The supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 cannot alter findings of lower tribunals without clear manifest errors, particularly regarding vacancy reporting tied to expired lists.
Candidates included in a rank list have no indefeasible right to be appointed, and the state is not obligated to fill all vacancies. Candidates cannot claim a right to vacancies that are not reported....
Point of Law : Rule 13 of Kerala Public Service Commission Rules stipulates that ranked lists published by Commission shall remain in force for a period of one year from date on which it was brought ....
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.