Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 27944
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
A. K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., JJ
STATE OF KERALA – Appellant
Versus
DR. C. HAREESH – Respondent
OP(KAT) NO. 173 OF 2022 | OP(KAT) NO. 121 OF 2022 | OP(KAT) NO. 179 OF 2022 | OP(KAT) NO. 180 OF 2022
For the Appellants/Petitioners: S.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR, P.C.SASIDHARAN, RAJU VADAKKEKARA
For the Respondents: J.JULIAN XAVIER, PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHEER, V.S.MARTIN JOSE
The Court emphasized the importance of thorough verification of vacancies by the Tribunal before making judgments on administrative appointments based on ranked lists.
Headnote:(A) Kerala Public Service Commission Act, 1960 - Relevant vacancy reporting procedures - The ranked list for appointment to the post of Veterinary Surgeon Grade II was prepared and the subsequent vacancies not reported during its validity was a key aspect. The Tribunal’s interim directive for vacancy reporting was contested, emphasizing a need for verifying factual accuracy about unreported vacancies. (Paras 2, 3, 4, 5)
(B) Judicial Discretion - Judicial analysis favored remittance of the decision for further fact-finding, allowing the Tribunal to assess newly presented documents that were not previously available for consideration, thus reinforcing procedural propriety in administrative decisions. (Paras 4, 5)
Facts of the case:
The applicants challenged the Tribunal's findings regarding unreported vacancies for appointment post-expiration of the ranked list, seeking directions for the State to report these vacancies to the Commission.
Findings of Court:
The Court set aside the Tribunal's order for re-evaluation of 62 vacancies based on new documents.
Issues: The key issue focused on the existence and reporting of vacancies during the constrained time frame of the ranked list's validity.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized ensuring all documents and perspectives be accounted for in administrative appointments, directing a re-review by the Tribunal.
Result: The original petitions are disposed with instructions for further review by the Tribunal.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. expired ranked list and additional vacancies. (Para 2) |
| 2. tribunal’s direction on vacancies. (Para 3) |
| 3. state's contention on unreported vacancies. (Para 4) |
| 4. remittance for re-evaluation by tribunal. (Para 5) |
JUDGMENT
A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar. J.
As all these original petitions involve a common issue and impugn the common order dated 24.3.2022 of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal (KAT) in OA Nos.1876 of 2020 and 1957 of 2020, they are taken up together for consideration and disposed by this common judgment.
2. The original applications referred above were filed by candidates who were included in a ranked list prepared by the Kerala Public Service Commission (PSC) for appointment to the post of Veterinary Surgeon Grade II in the Animal Husbandry Department. The rank list was brought into force on 14.12.2017 and the validity of the ranked list expired on 13.12.2020. The applicants had initially alleged that almost 223 additional vacancies had existed at the time of the expiry of the ranked list and the said vacancies were never reported to the PSC during the currency of the ranked list. The prayer in the original applications was essentially for a direction to the Animal Husbandry Department to report the vacancies to the PSC and to the PSC to effect advises against the said vacancies from the ranked list.
3. It would appear that the Tribunal that considered the original applications, by an interim order dated 10.12.2020, directed 150 vacancies of Veterinary Surgeon Grade II to be reported to the PSC provisionally, pending final disposal of the original applications. During the course of the arguments in the original applications, however, the applicants limited their prayer to 86 vacancies in lieu of 223 vacancies that were initially claimed. The Tribunal, thereafter considered the rival submissions and found that only 62 additional vacancies remained to be reported and the said 62 vacancies had arisen during the currency of Annexure A1 ranked list. It directed the reporting of the said vacancies and issued a further direction to the PSC to effect advises against the said vacancies. The split-up of the 62 vacancies, as comprised of 32 + 30 vacancies, was also noticed by the Tribunal in the impugned order. The 32 vacancies in turn consisted of 18 deputation vacancies and 14 Leave Without Allowance vacancies. The 30 vacancies on the other hand were vacancies that were earlier earmarked for abolition by the Government, but which abolition order was not pursued by the Government as it went ahead and made appointments to the said vacancies, some of which were from the ranked list in force as on the date of consideration of the original applications.
4. The order of the Tribunal has been impugned before us in these original petitions with OP(KAT) No.173 of 2022 being filed by the State against the common order in relation to OA No.1957 of 2020 and OP(KAT)No.180 of 2022 being preferred by the State against the common order in as much as it relates to OA No.1876 of 2020. The other original petitions namely, OP(KAT)Nos.179 of 2022 and 121 of 2022 are filed by the applicants in OA No.1876 of 2020 and the contesting respondents in the said original applications, respectively. In OP(KAT) No.180 of 2022 preferred by the State against the common order of the Tribunal the State relies on Exts.P13, P14 and P15 to contend that, in fact, the 62 unreported vacancies that were found to exist by the Tribunal did not really exist. It is their contention that the 30 vacancies which were abolished by the State Government through a Government Order dated 7.11.2003 could not be filled up thereafter in theory, but as a matter of fact the Government had actually filled up the said posts in anticipation of a subsequent sanction from the government for filling up those posts. It is further submitted that in anticipation of the sanctioning of those posts which were abolished in 2003, 22 persons from an earlier ranked list and 7 persons from Ann
