IMPORTANT POINT
Vacancies arising during the extended validity of a ranked list must be advised, regardless of their reporting date, as long as they arose before the list's final expiry.

JUDGMENT :

A. Muhamed Mustaque, J.

A notification was issued for the post of Last Grade Servants in various departments in 14 districts, including Thrissur district, by the Kerala Public Service Commission (PSC) on 12/05/2017. The ranked list came into force on 30/06/2018. The ranked list was due to expire on 29/06/2021. The PSC extended the validity period of the ranked list due to the outbreak of COVID-19 up to 04/08/2021. However, taking note of the COVID pandemic and based on different challenges before this Court and the Tribunal, the ranked list period was extended and finally expired on 29/09/2021. On 02/08/2021, the office of the Deputy Director of Education, Thrissur, reported 11 vacancies for the post of Office Assistants in Thrissur district. It was mentioned in the proforma that these 11 vacancies were anticipated vacancies. On 04/08/2021, a request was made from the office of the Deputy Director of Education, Thrissur, to revoke 8 vacancies out of the 11 vacancies reported. It was stated that out of those who were promoted as Lab Assistants from the post of Office Assistants, 8 had relinquished their promotion, and therefore, only 3 vacancies exist. Accordingly, it was requested that Proforma ID 21505, dated 02/08/2021, be revoked in respect of 11 vacancies. On 03/08/2021, another proforma was forwarded from the office of the Education Department, reporting 11 vacancies. This proforma stated that 11 vacancies existed as on 01/08/2021. The PSC, acting on a letter dated 04/08/2021, advised on 3 vacancies. Thereafter, it is seen that on 22/11/2021, a request was made from the Deputy Director of Education to issue advice for 8 vacancies; PSC did not act on that request.

2. The respondents are the applicants before the Tribunal. They were included in the ranked list for appointment as Office Assistants in Thrissur District. They approached the Tribunal, seeking a direction to the PSC to issue advice for vacancies based on the Proforma for reporting vacancies issued by the Deputy Director of Education.

3. The PSC took the stand that they issued advice for 3 substantive vacancies, and 8 out of the 11 vacancies arose after 03/08/2021; and since the ranked list expired on 04/08/2021, they cannot issue advice for the subsequently arisen vacancies. The case was filed in the year 2022. If the ranked list expired on 04/08/2021, PSC was justified in its stand.

4. Two questions arise: first, about vacancies that arose after the expiry of the ranked list on 04/08/2021; and second, about the effect of the cancellation of the proforma.

Point No. i

5. This Court vide judgment in OP(KAT) No. 359/2021, dated 17/06/2022, ordered that the ranked list would stand extended by three months. The PSC had challenged the above judgment before the Apex Court. The Apex Court dismissed the above challenge in SLP No.104-113/2023 on 29/07/2024. Therefore, based on the direction of this Court, the validity of the ranked list was extended upto 29/09/2021. According to the Department of Education, 8 vacancies arose as detailed below.

Out of the 8 vacancies, 5 vacancies arose prior to 29/09/2021.

6. The argument of the learned Standing Counsel for the PSC is that all these vacancies have arisen after the expiry of the ranked list and, therefore, in the light of the judgments of the Full Bench of this Court in Vimala Kumari v. State [ 1994 KHC 295 ] and Kerala Public Service Commission and Another v. Sheejamol M. C. and Others [ 2020 (5) KHC 555], as well as the judgments of the Division Bench in Balakrishnan v. PSC [ 1994 KHC 119] and Public Service Commission v. Govindan [ 2000 KHC 9], this Court cannot direct the PSC to make appointments based on such vacancies.

7. The Court cannot direct iss