The court upheld the legal validity of altering selection norms mid-process to adhere to community reservations, stating it did not substantially prejudice candidates.

JUDGMENT

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

The appellants herein are aggrieved by the impugned common judgment dated 17.11.2021 rendered by the learned Single Judge, whereby WP(C).Nos.23128 & 23120 of 2021 (filed by the appellants herein) have been dismissed.

2. Heard Smt.Priya Shanavas, learned counsel appearing for the writ appellants/writ petitioners and Sri.B.Unnikrishna Kaimal, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondents in the WAs/WP(C)s.

3. The sole appellant in each of these two appeals have responded to the selection notification issued on behalf of the respondents for selection and appointment on contract basis to the post of Secretary, District Tourism Promotion Council (DTPC) in respect of the 14 districts in the State of Kerala. They have participated in the written examination and they were excluded from the shortlist of candidates who were called for the interview.

4. The appellants would impugn the selection process on two grounds. The first ground is that one of the norms in the selection process was that the unit of appointment shall be 'district' and the appointment will be made separately for each of the 14 districts concerned, and that the said norm was subsequently changed by the Government after the last date of submission of applications and therefore the entire selection process carried on the basis of changed norms, which have been introduced midway of the selection process, is illegal and ultra vires . The second contention raised by the appellants is that the shortlisting of candidates done by the respondents in this case, by introducing a cut off mark of 24.75 marks out of 100 marks in the written examination, which has no rational basis for justifying the impugned shortlisting process and which is not provided in the selection notification, is illegal.

5. It is common ground that in pursuance of the impugned selection process, the written examination was conducted by the respondents in which altogether 138 candidates, including the two appellants herein, have participated. As regards the first contention, the following aspects would be relevant. [The documents referred to hereinafter will be with reference to the documents marked in the counter affidavit filed by the respondents in WP(C).No.23128/2021 which has led to W.A.No.1544/2021 as well as the documents in the counter affidavit filed by the respondents in said W.A.No.1544/2021.] The norms for the present selection process have been issued by the competent authority of the 1 st respondent State Government in the Tourism Department as per Ext.R-2(a) G.O. (MS) No.15/2021/Tourism dated 18.8.2021. The annexure appended to the said Ext.R-2(a) G.O. deals with the norms of the selection process. Part III of said scheme deals with the revised guidelines/criteria for the selection and appointment to the post of Secretary, DTPC. Clause 2 of Part III of said scheme deals with qualifications, experience for appointment to the post of Secretary, DTPC. Therein it is clearly stipulated as follows:

"Appointments to the post of Secretary, DTPC will be carried out from open market, on contract basis, strictly observing reservation norms applicable. "

[emphasis supplied]

6. Clause 5 of Part III of said scheme deals with selection procedure and it is stipulated therein as follows:

"The Director, Department of Tourism will invite separate applications to the post of Secretary, DTPC in each District."

7. Clause 6 of Part III of said scheme deals with written test and interview and thereunder it is stipulat