JUDGMENT

Dated this the 22nd day of August, 2022 This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:-

i) To issue a Writ of Mandamus or order or direction to the 4th respondent to include the petitioner in Ext. P5 seniority list as SI. No. 3 instead of 78.

ii) to issue a Writ of Mandamus or order or direction to the 3rd respondent to appoint the petitioner as Lower Division Clerk under 10% quota at least with effect from the date on which his immediate junior was appointed and to give all consequential benefits there from.

ii) to declare that the petitioner is eligible to be appointed as Lower Division Clerk under 10% quota meant for low paid employees of Kerala Water Authority since as per Ext.P3 the Lineman is also a low paid employee.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for respondents.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was appointed as Lascar in the Kerala Water Authority by Ext.P1 proceedings dated 5/1/2004. He was thereafter posted as Lineman by Ext.P2 proceedings dated 14/12/2007. It is submitted that when Ext.P4 list was prepared for appointment to the post of Lower Division Clerk from 10% quota set apart for by transfer appointment from lower categories, the petitioner was given seniority taking note of his initial appointment that is 5/1/2004. However, it is submitted that without hearing the petitioner, the list was revised and Ext.P5 provisional list has been prepared, in which the petitioner is shown as Sl.No.78 with his date of advice and date to be considered for seniority shown as 14/12/2007. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner having been advised for appointment in the year, 2004 his date of advice can by no stretch of imagination be shown as 14/12/2007.

4. It is further contended that since the post of Lascar as well as Lineman/Line Maistry is in the same scale of pay and in view of the fact that appointment is to be made by transfer from lower categories of posts, the petitioner is entitled to be included in the list at the appropriate place, taking note of his date of initial advice as Lascar. It is submitted that pursuant to Ext.P5 provisional seniority list, Ext.P7 order has been issued appointing persons who are much junior to the petitioner as Lower Division Clerk by transfer while the petitioner's claim is not considered. It is submitted that the petitioner has submitted representations before the respondents, but the same remain unattended.

5. A statement has been placed on record by the respondents contending that by Ext.P6, the Rules have been amended making it clear that additional 10% of the vacancies of Lower Division Clerks are reserved for qualified service personnel in any of the lower categories included in the Kerala Water Authority (Administrative, Ministerial and Last Grade) Service Rules or the Kerala Water Authority Public Health Engineering Service Rules based on their seniority in the lower post for by transfer appointment. It is submitted that in view of the specific provisions in the Rule that the appointment by transfer will be based on the seniority in the lower post, the petitioner is entitled to count seniority only from the date when he was appointed to the present post by Ext.P2 that is on 14/12/2007. A Reply affidavit has also been placed on record.

6. Having considered the contentions advanced, I notice that the petitioner's date of advice to the post of Lascar was admittedly 5/1/2004. The respondents could not have changed the said date of advice as 14/12/2007 even if their contentions are accepted. The petitioner's contention that he is entitled to have his seniority with effect from his date of initial advise, reckoned for the purpose of considering seniority for the purpose of appointment by transfer to the post of LDC from low paid employees, requires a consideration at the hands of the respondents. In the meanwhile, in view of the fact tha