Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 32071
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, J
P.BALASUBRAMANIAN – Appellant
Versus
THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 33690 OF 2019
For the Appellants/Petitioners: R.T.PRADEEP, M.BINDUDAS, K.C.HARISH
For the Respondents: SRI.B.G.HARINDRANATH, SRI MILLU DANDAPANI, SRI.SREEDHAR RAVINDRAN, SRI.B.G.HARINDRANATH, SRI SANTHOSH MATHEW, SMT.LAKSHMI RAMADAS, APARNA RAJAN, DHANUJA M.S
Amendments to service rules under Article 229 of the Constitution can operate retrospectively and do not infringe on non-constitutional vested rights.
Headnote:(A) Article 229 of the Constitution of India - Kerala High Court Service Rules, 2007 - Amendment of Rule 20(6) - Exclusion of Library Assistants from promotion eligibility - The petitioners claimed that their rights were affected by the amendment, which sought to enforce higher qualifications for Library Assistants, altering conditions of service for those in lower feeder categories. The Court addressed whether the retrospective amendment violated vested rights or constituted an unreasonable classification. Findings highlighted the paramountcy of efficiency in library operations and affirmed the Chief Justice's authority to amend service rules under Article 229, establishing no vested rights entitling the petitioners to promotion under repealed qualifications. (Paras 1, 11, 26, 33)
(B) Vested rights and amendments - The Court found no merit in petitioners' claims that their rights had been violated by the amendment to Rule 20(6), clarifying that being considered for promotion does not guarantee a vested right to promotion. (Paras 18, 20, 24)
(C) Judicial authority - The Chief Justice holds absolute authority in regulating service conditions under Article 229, and his amendments cannot be challenged on the grounds presented. (Paras 18, 33)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners' employment status and grievances. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. details on rule amendments and their implications. (Para 3 , 5) |
| 3. arguments on the unconstitutional nature of exemptions. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 4. nature of the rules and powers under article 229. (Para 11 , 12 , 18) |
| 5. amendments and vested rights concerning employee promotions. (Para 19 , 24) |
| 6. final dismissal of the petition. (Para 26 , 33) |
JUDGMENT
The 1st petitioner is serving as a Lift Operator, and the 2nd petitioner is serving as an Attender in the High Court of Kerala.
They come within the category of Employees in Division II of Part II of the Kerala High Court Service Rules , 2007 (‘Rules, 2007’ for the sake of brevity).
They have approached this Court, being aggrieved by Ext.P1 notification as per which Sub Rule (6) of Rule 20 of Rules, 2007 stood amended, and the post of Library Assistant was excluded from the operation of Rule 20(6).
By excluding Library Assistants from the operation of Rule 20(6), they contend that the conditions of service of employees like them who entered service prior to the coming into force of the 2007 Rules stood altered, and their right to promotion got curtailed.
2. To understand the grievances of the petitioners, it would be apposite to detail the bare minimum facts:
a) Article 229 of Constitution of India speaks about conditions of service of officers and servants of a High Court. (2) reads as follows:
“Subject to the provisions of any law made by the Legislature of the State, the conditions of service of officers and servants of a High Court shall be such as may be prescribed by rules made by the Chief Justice of the Court or by some other Judge or officer of the Court authorised by the Chief Justice to make rules for the purpose: Provided that the rules made under this clause shall, so far as they relate to salaries, allowances, leave or pensions, require the approval of the Governor of the State.”
b) In exercise of powers conferred under Article 229 of the Constitution of India , the Chief Justice, with the approval of the Governor of Kerala, so far as the Rules relate to the salaries, allowances, leave, and pension, framed the Kerala High Court Service Rules , 1970 (‘1970 Rules’ for the sake of brevity).
The rules were published in Kerala Gazette No.3 dated 19.01.1971, and the same came into force with effect from the said date.
c) The post of Library Assistant comes under Division II Category No.16A.
The method of appointment is promotion, transfer, or direct recruitment.
The qualification prescribed is SSLC.
d) The 1970 Rules were repealed, and Rules, 2007 was published in Kerala Gazette on 13.02.2007.
The Rules came into force on 01.01.2007.
The post of Library Assistant is categorized as No.4 in Sub-Division (6) of Division II of the Rules, 2007.
The relevant portion of the Rules, 2007, is extracted below for easy reference.
Annexure-I
e) Rule 20 of the Rules, 2007 deals with promotion and appointment by transfer. It reads as follows:
| Sub Division | Category | Name of Post | Methods of Appointment | Qualification |
| 6 | 4 | Library Assistant | Appointment by transfer or direct recruitment | 1. University degree 2. A degree or diploma in Library Science |
“20. Promotion and appointment by transfer. (1) (a) The following categories shall be treated as selection categories for promotion which shall be made on ground of merit and ability, seniority being considered only where merit and ability are approximately equal: xxxxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx (6) Notwithstanding anything contained in these Rules, for promotion to higher categories, the qualifications prescribed for appointments to various posts as per these Rules will be inapplicable to incumbents in Service in the lower or feeder categories as on the date of coming into force of these Rules.
Qualifications prescribed in the repealed Rules shall govern them for promotion.” f)
By operation of Rule of Rules, 2007, High Court Service Rules, 1970 stood repealed. However, it was mentioned that subject to what is sta
