2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 40501
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ALEXANDER THOMAS, T. R. Ravi, JJ
KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, – Appellant
Versus
SWAROOP V.R. – Respondent
OP(KAT)/11/2021
SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SRI.M.SASINDRAN, SRI.B.VINOD, SR.GOVT.PLEADER
The ruling clarifies that rank lists of the Kerala Public Service Commission can remain valid beyond their expiry if no candidates are advised from them, based on specific rules governing such lists.
Headnote:
Judicial Review - Employment - Articles 226, 227 of the Constitution of India - Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 - Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 - Kerala Public Service Commission Rules of Procedure, Rule 13, Rule 14 - The court analyzed the validity period of rank lists, the implications of the vacancies for differently-abled candidates, and the necessity of interim orders in light of established rules concerning advice and appointment processes.
Fact of the Case:
The case revolves around the challenge to an interim order by the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, which protected the rights of a candidate ranked No.1 on a list for a Lecturer position, amidst the claims regarding vacancies reserved for differently-abled candidates.
Issues: Whether the interim order was justified given the status of the rank list and vacancies, and if the rank list's validity was maintained under the procedural rules of the Kerala Public Service Commission.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the rank list continued to remain valid beyond its initial expiry date due to extensions applicable under the Kerala Public Service Commission Rules, thereby invalidating the interim order.
Final Decision: The interim order by the Kerala Administrative Tribunal dated 24.08.2020 was quashed.
J U D G M E N T
Alexander Thomas,J.
The aforecaptioned original petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers:
(i) To set aside Exhibit P3 order of the Hon'ble Tribunal dated 24.08.2020 in O.A.(EKM) No.2937/2017 and thereby dismiss the Interim Application.
And (ii) To issue such other writ, order or direction as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. Heard Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala Public Service Commission appearing for the petitioner in the O.P./R2 in the O.A before the Tribunal, Sri.M.Sasindran, learned counsel appearing for R1 in the O.P/original applicant before the Tribunal and Sri.B.Vinod, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for official respondents 2 to 4 in the O.P.
3. It is the case of the original applicant before the Tribunal that he has been duly included in the rank list for the post of Lecturer in Food Science, Collegiate Education Department, Government of Kerala, published in the Gazette dated 15.12.2012 for category No.621/2012 and that the rank list has come into force on 30.08.2017. From the pleadings and materials of both sides it appears that the original applicant was included in Annexure-A2 rank list as Rank No.1 therein. Further it appears that one vacancy in the post of Lecturer in Food Science was reported by the appointing authority to the petitioner Kerala Public Service Commission. Further, it is the case of the Public Service Commission that the turn to be filled up for advising the candidate utilizing the said vacancy was set apart for DA candidate (Differently Abled Candidate) from the abovesaid rank list as per the prescriptions in circular No.05/2017 issued by the Kerala Public Service Commission based on the norms issued by the State Government in G.O.(P) No.8/2017/SWD dated 06.05.201, wherein the turns of the Differently Abled Candidates were revised from turns 33, 66, 99 to 1, 34, 67 respectively. Further it is the case of the Public Service Commission that in fact no DA candidate was available for advice from the rank list and hence the vacancy was set apart to be filled up from the next rank list as a “no candidate available” turn (NCA turn) going by prescriptions in Section 36 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act , 1995 (Central Act 1 of 1996), read with Section 34 (2) of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016 (Central Act 49/2016).
4. R1 herein has filed the instant Original Application, O.A. (EKM).No.2937 of 2017 before the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench, with the following prayers (see page
21 of the paper book of the Original Petition):
“a). Issue a direction to the respondents to give appointment to the applicant t0 the post of Lecturer in Food Science in the Department of Collegiate Education b). to direct the 3rd respondent to report one vacancy of Lecturer in Food Science to the 2nd respondent for appointment from Annexure-A2 rank list.
c). to direct the 3rd respondent to advise the applicant who is the rank No.1 in Annexure-A2 list for appointment to the post of Lecturer in Food Science.
d). to command the 1st and 3rd respondents to appoint the applicant to the post of Lecturer in Food Science from the Annexure A2 rank list.
e). declare that applicant is eligible and entitled to get appointment to the post of Lecture in Food Science in the Department of Collegiate Education;
f). issue such other appropriate order or direction as this Hon'ble Tribunal deems just and fit in the circumstance of the case.”
5. It appears that the apprehension of the original applicant was to the effect that ordinarily the maximum currency 0f the rank list could be only for a period of three years, going by the operative portion of Rule 13 of the Kerala Public Service Commission Rules of Procedure and that the maximum validity period of the rank list may get expi