Selection processes for municipal positions must adhere to established regulations; failure to comply renders claims of entitlement nonviable.

J U D G M E N T

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The petitioner seeks to direct the Manjeri Municipality to issue immediate orders appointing him as Substitute Sanitation Worker.

2. The petitioner states that he has registered with the Employment Exchange. The petitioner was nominated by the Employment Exchange for selection and appointment to the post of Substitute Sanitation Worker in Manjeri Municipality. The petitioner attended the interview conducted by the Municipality. Though the petitioner performed well in the interview, he was not selected for appointment. Respondents 4 and 5, who are less meritorious, however, were selected for appointment. 3. The petitioner states that the 4^th respondent was appointed purportedly in pursuance of the judgment of this Court. Selection made without recourse to Employment Exchange is illegal and unsustainable, contends the petitioner. The methodology of interview followed by the Municipality is also illegal. The petitioner therefore seeks to quash the illegal appointments and to direct the Manjeri Municipality to issue immediate orders appointing the petitioner as Substitute Sanitation Worker.

4. The 4^th respondent filed a counter affidavit.

The 4^th respondent submitted that pursuant to the interview conducted by the Municipality, a rank list was prepared. The rank list contained candidates sponsored by the Employment Exchange as well as employees temporarily working under the Municipality for long years. The 4^th respondent was subjected to selection process pursuant to the orders of this Court.

5. The 4^th respondent has been appointed after due process of selection. In view of Section 224 of the Kerala Municipalities Act , power is vested with the Municipal Council to make appointments of Substitute Sanitation Workers. The writ petition is therefore without any merit, contended the 4^th respondent.

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 and 2, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 3^rd respondent and the learned counsel appearing for respondents 4 and 5.

7. The petitioner was sponsored by the Employment Exchange for selection for appointment to the post of Substitute Sanitation Worker in Manjeri Municipality. The petitioner belongs to Muslim community and therefore is entitled to Muslim reservation quota.

8. After the interview, the Municipality has drawn a consolidated mark list. In the category 'Muslim' for which there are two vacancies, respondents 4 and 5 were ranked 1 and 2, with marks 89 and 84 respectively. The petitioner was placed at rank No.7 only. Therefore, going by Ext.P2 rank list for Muslim category, the petitioner cannot claim a superior right for appointment over respondents 4 and 5.

9. As regards the requirement of sponsorship by the Employment Exchange, candidates who have been working as temporary Sanitation Workers for long period in the Municipality were also directed to be considered for appointment. It is after interviewing the candidates sponsored by the Employment Exchange and the temporary workers working in the Municipality that the select list was prepared.

In the said circumstances of the case, I do not find any merit in the writ petition. The writ petition is hence dismissed.