Allowed

Raj.N.Nair v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC23 Sept 2019OP(KAT)/160/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the Government order rejecting a claim for job vacancies in the Medical Education Department. The Court set aside the Government order and the Tribunal's failure to interfere, directing the Government to reconsider the matter within three months afresh. The Court held that vacancies exist despite irregular continuance of some employees.

What did the court decide?

Set aside the impugned order of the Tribunal and the Government order directing the Government to pass fresh orders within three months regarding the vacancies.

Raj.N.Nair Vs the State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

¶6

MONDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 1ST ASWINA, 1941

¶7

OP(KAT).No.160 OF 2016(Z)

¶8

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 07-10-2016 IN O.A.NO.1101/2015 OF KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶9

PETITIONERS/APPLICANTS:

¶10

1 RAJI.N.NAIR AGED 34 YEARS, W/O. SREEHARI, MADHAVAPPALLY HOUSE, MANAPPURAM P.O., CHERTHALA -688 558.

¶11

2 REENA M.C AGED 45 YEARS, W/O. MURALEEDHARAN, 'TAPASYA', KALAVANCODAM, CHERTHAALA - 688 524.

¶12

3 BINDHU S. AGED 44 YEARS, D/O. VASU, THAZHCHAVELIYIL HOUSE, MARUTHOORVATTOM P.O., CHERTHALA-688545.

¶13

4 RETHI V.P. AGED 44 YEARS, W/O. RAMESAN, LAKSHMI VILASAM, ARYAD NORTH P.O., ALAPPUZHA-688542.

¶14

5 ASHALETHIKA G. AGED 44 YEARS, D/O. GOPALAN NAIR, MURUKA NIVAS, VETTUVENI, KARTHIKAPALLY, HARIPAD.

¶15

6 REJIMOL C.N. AGED 36 YEARS, D/O. NEELAKANDAN, PADIYAREKUNNAPPILLIL HOUSE, VELARVATTOM, CHERTHALA-688524.

¶16

BY ADVS. SRI.K.JAJU BABU (SR.) SRI.K.P.JUSTINE (KARIPAT)

¶17

OP(KAT) No.160 of 2016

¶18

¶19

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶20

1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶21

2 THE DIRECTOR HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶22

3 THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶23

4 THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-681004.

¶24

5 THE DISTRICT OFFICER KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-681004.

¶25

6 THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, ALAPPUZHA-681005.

¶26

R1-6 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.ANTONY MUKKATH

¶27

THIS OP(KAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20.09.2019, THE COURT ON 23.09.2019 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶28

OP(KAT) No.160 of 2016

Judgment

Chitambaresh, J.

1.Annexure-A20 order of the Government is obviously not in accordance with the directions in Annexure-A17 order of the Tribunal which is in consonance with Annexure-A12 judgment of this Court. Options were invited from the employees to either continue in Health Services Department or to go over to the Medical Education Department after the abolition of the dual control system. The relevant clause in the Government Order, G.O.(P)No.548/2008/H&FWD dated 25.10.2008 is extracted below:

¶33

“(d) The staff of Health Services Department now working under Director of Medical Education also will have to file option if they wish to continue in Department of Medical Education.”

¶34

The necessary corollary therefore is that those who do not file option to continue in the Department of Medical Education even within the extended time have to work under the Director of Medical Education only. Annexure-A12 judgment directed the respondents to determine the vacancies after deploying the

¶35

OP(KAT) No.160 of 2016

¶36

¶37

excess hands in each district dependent on the options filed.

¶38

2.Annexure-A17 order of the Tribunal followed directing the Government to pass orders on the representation of the petitioners as regards the vacancies that existed before the expiry of the ranked list on 31.3.2014. The Public Service Commission could advise candidates for a maximum of 18 vacancies which was provisionally directed to be reported by an interim order of the Tribunal. But Annexure-A20 order resultantly passed by the Government does not decipher the actual number of vacancies in tune with Annexure-A12 judgment and Annexure-A17 order.

¶39

3.The only consideration in Annexure-A20 order is as follows:

¶40

“Considering the facts that the contention of the appellants have no merits as only two posts have been finally shifted to M.E.S.(Medical Education Service) from H.S.D.(Health Services Department), the claim of the petitioners stands rejected and the direction of the Hon'ble KAT is complied with accordingly.”

¶41

All that is discernible from Annexure-A20 order is that two employees by name Renuka V. and Valsala N.T. had opted for

¶42

OP(KAT) No.160 of 2016

¶43

¶44

continuance in the Department of Medical Education which was accepted. The vacancies shall not be refused to be reckoned merely because some of the employees illegally continued in the Department of Medical Education even without filing any option as mandated. It is for the Government to set right the irregularity and decipher the vacancies for it to be filled up from the ranked list of the Public Service Commission then in vogue. It should be borne in mind that the Public Service Commission has published a combined ranked list and vacancies would still be available even after deployment by option.

¶45

4.The petitioners who find a place in the ranked list assert that they

¶46

have a right to be considered for appointment for the 18 vacancies provisionally reported even before the expiry of the ranked list. We do feel that there is a total non-application of mind in passing Annexure-A20 order by the Government and the Tribunal erred in not interfering with the same by Ext.P1 order impugned. We set aside Ext.P1 order as well as Annexure-A20 order and direct the Government to pass orders anew in the light of the observations made above. The same shall be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this

¶47

OP(KAT) No.160 of 2016

¶48

¶49

judgment after due notice to the petitioners who shall be afforded an opportunity of being heard.

¶50

The original petition is allowed. No costs.

¶51

Sd/-

¶52

V. CHITAMBARESH, JUDGE

¶53

Sd/ASHOK MENON, JUDGE

¶54

Sha/200919

¶55

OP(KAT) No.160 of 2016

¶56

¶57

APPENDIX

¶58

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

¶59

EXHIBIT P1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 07/10/2016 IN O.A 1101 OF 2015 OF THE HONOURABLE KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL (ERNAKULAM BENCH)

¶60

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE O.A 1101/2015 BEFORE THE KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ALONG WITH ANNEXURES-A1 TO ANNEXURE-A23 DATED 12/10/2015. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(MS) NO. 382/2010/H&FWD DATED 23/06/2016 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(RT) 2945/2011/H&FWD DATED 17/08/2011

¶61

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL.

Raj.N.Nair v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj.N.Nair v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arjun Ambalapatta Vs Union of India

State of Kerala Vs v.Vijayan

Subramanian.v Vs Union of India

Divya S. Rajan Vs the Kerala Public Service Commission

Muhammed Mukthar.K.v Vs the Director of Panchayaths

T.M.Annamma, Vs Union of India