Petitioner challenging appointment of lab technician as internal turn not arisen and external candidates recruitment followed reserved rules. Writ petition dismissed.
Writ petition dismissed; no interference with appointment of 3rd respondent.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA
TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1939
WP(C).No. 2857 of 2018
PETITIONER(S)
SREEKUMAR.S.T, S/O.MR. K. SREEDHARAN, THAMARA, T.C 54/2120 (2), MGRA - 42, PAPPANAMCODE P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 018.
BY ADVS.SRI.C.A.MAJEED SRI.P.RAHIM SRI.K.H.ASIF SMT.MOLTY MAJEED SRI.K.J.SHARATH KUMAR SMT.AFITHA P BEERAN
RESPONDENT(S):
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE (J) , SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2. REGIONAL CANCER CENTRE, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, P.O.BOX NO. 2417, MEDICAL COLLEGE CAMPUS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695011.
3. KUMAR T.N., AGED 42 YEARS, HOUSE NO. E-30, ARCHANA NAGAR, PONGUMMOODU, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., PIN - 695 011.
R1 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN R2 BY ADV. SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
TS
WP(C).No. 2857 of 2018 (F)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
| EXHIBIT-P1 |
PHOTOCOPY OF THE 01/07/2014 ISSUED PETITIONER |
EXPERIENCE C BY THE 2ND |
ERTIFICATE DATED RESPONDENT TO THE |
|---|---|---|---|
| EXHIBIT-P2 |
PHOTOCOPY OF THE ISSUED BY THE 2ND |
CALL LETTER RESPONDENT |
DATED 24/06/2008 TO THE PETITIONER |
| EXHIBIT-P3 |
PHOTOCOPY OF THE 24/06/2009 ISSUED PETITIONER |
APPOINTMENT BY THE 2ND |
ORDER DATED RESPONDENT TO THE |
| EXHIBIT-P4 |
PHOTOCOPY OF THE 25/02/2011 ISSUED |
G.O(MS) 123/ BY THE IST |
2011/H&FWD DATED RESPONDENT |
| EXHIBTI-P5 |
PHOTOCOPY OF THE 22/12/2015 ISSUED |
G.O(MS) NO. BY THE IST |
298/2015/H&FWD DATED RESPONDENT |
| EXHIBIT-P6 |
PHOTOCOPY OF THE ISSUED BY THE 2ND |
NOTIFICATION RESPONDENT |
DATED 25/11/2013 |
| EXHIBIT-P7 |
PHOTOCOPY OF THE CANDIDATES AND IN EFFECT FROM 08/05 RESPONDENT. |
RANK LIST OF TERNAL CANDI /2015 ISSUED |
EXTERNAL DATES WITH BY THE 2ND |
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS - NIL ------------------------------
/TRUE COPY/
PS TO JUDGE
TS 17/03/2018
P.V.ASHA J.
W.P.(C).No.2857 of 2018
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 13th day of March, 2018
Petitioner, who is Rank No.30 in Ext.P7 Rank list
among internal candidates, has filed this writ petition, complaining that the 3rd respondent is appointed without following the reservation or rotation.
notification inviting applications for appointment of Lab Technicians from among candidates from open market and from among internal candidates. Ext.P7 Rank list
was published on 08.05.2015. According to the petitioner, he has been working as Lab Technician under the second respondent on daily wages from 01.07.2009 onwards. Pursuant to Ext.P6 notification,
W.P.(C).No.2857 of 2018
2
he had also submitted application. He claims that one Scheduled Caste candidate was appointed from the Rank List and when he left the job, the 3rd respondent, who does not belong to Scheduled Caste community, was appointed, violating the principles of reservation.
that the petitioner cannot have any claim as against
W.P.(C).No.2857 of 2018
3
the appointment of 3rd respondent, even if he was appointed after a Scheduled Caste candidate had left, because 3rd respondent is one included in the list of external candidates. There is no basis for the apprehension also of the petitioner that the respondents would not make appointment in accordance with the rules of reservation. At any rate, petitioner can have a right to stake his claim only when his turn arises from the list of the internal candidates.
In the above circumstances, I do not find any reason to interfere with the appointment of the 3rd respondent or with the selection and appointments made to the post from Ext.P7 Rank List. The writ petition fails and is dismissed.
Sd/-
P.V.ASHA, JUDGE.
AS
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appointment of an external candidate can be challenged if the post was vacated by a Scheduled Caste internal candidate.
Whether the petitioner has any claim to the appointment despite the appointment being made from the external candidates list.
SREEKUMAR.S.T
STATE OF KERALA
REGIONAL CANCER CENTRE
KUMAR T.N.
P.V.ASHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
