Partly allowed

Saheer Babu K.T. v. the University of Calicut

Kerala HC11 Dec 2019WP(C)/658/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Connected writ petitions by diploma-holder and degree-holder Assistant Engineers of Calicut University over promotion to Assistant Executive Engineer. The court held the First Ordinance governs, promotion being based on seniority and qualification with qualification weighing only where seniority is equal; the KS&SSR special-rule ratio did not apply. The Syndicate's cancellation of the diploma hold

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the Syndicate's communications dated 07.09.2012 cancelling the diploma holder's promotion as Assistant Executive Engineer and a direction to regularize his service within one month.

Saheer Babu K.T. Vs the University of Calicut — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 20TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.20814 OF 2012(B)

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

JAYAN PADASSERI, AGED 36 YEARS, ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (CIVIL), UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.T.B.HOOD SRI.AMAL KASHA SMT.M.ISHA

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, THENHIPALAM - 673 635, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶11

2 THE VICE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, THENHIPALAM, PIN-673 635, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶12

3 THE SYNDICATE, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, REPRESENTED BY THE VICE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY CAMPUS, CALICUT UNIVERSITY, THENHIPALAM - 673 635, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶13

4 SAHIRBABU K.T., ASSISTANT ENGINEER (CIVIL), UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, THENHIPALAM - 673 635, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶14

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶15

¶16

*ADDL. K. SIVADASAN, R5 ASSISTANT ENGINEER (CIVIL), ENGINEERING SERVICE, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., PIN-673 635.

¶17

*ADDITIONAL R5 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 18.10.2012 IN IA 13782/2012

¶18

*ADDL. REKHA P., R6 ASSISTANT ENGINEER (CIVIL), UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT

¶19

*ADDITIONAL R6 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 23.02.2015 IN IA 2496/15.

¶20

BY ADVS. R1 & R2 - SRI.MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., SC, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT R4 - SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (SR.) SMT.NISHA GEORGE ADDL.R5 - SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH SMT. K.P. GEETHAMANI ADDL.R6 - SRI. K.M. GEORGE

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05-11-2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).21439/2012(D), WP(C).658/2015(F), WP(C).35250/2016(E), THE COURT ON 11-12-2019 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16 3

¶23

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶24

PRESENT

¶25

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶26

WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 20TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941 WP(C).No.21439 OF 2012

¶27

PETITIONER/S:

¶28

K. SIVADASAN, AGED 43 YEARS, ASSISTANT ENGINEER (CIVIL), ENGINEERING SERVICE, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., PIN-673 635.

¶29

BY ADVS. SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH SRI.NAVEEN.T SRI.S.RAMESH

¶30

RESPONDENT/S:

¶31

**1 THE REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., PIN-673 635. 2 THE VICE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., PIN-673 635. 3 SAHEER BABU.K.T., ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (CIVIL), UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, ENGINEERING SERVICE, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., PIN-673 635. ADDL. REKHA P., R4 ASSISTANT ENGINEER (CIVIL), UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, ENGINEERING SERVICE, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., PIN - 673 635. (ADDITIONAL R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 13/03/2015 IN IA 3235/2015)

¶32

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶33

¶34

BY ADVS. R1 & R2 - SRI.MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., SC, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT R3 - SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (SR.) SMT.NISHA GEORGE ADDL. R4 - SRI.K.M.GEORGE SRI.P.K.MUHAMMED

¶35

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05-11-2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).20814/2012(B), WP(C).658/2015(F), WP(C).35250/2016(E), THE COURT ON 11-12-2019 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶36

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16 5

¶37

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶38

PRESENT

¶39

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶40

WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 20TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941

¶41

WP(C).No.658 OF 2015

¶42

PETITIONER/S:

¶43

SAHEER BABU K.T., AGED 41 YEARS, ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶44

BY ADVS. SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (SR.) SMT.NISHA GEORGE

¶45

RESPONDENT/S:

¶46

1 THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 505.

¶47

2 THE VICE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 505.

¶48

3 THE PRO VICE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 505.

¶49

*ADDL. JAYAN PADASSERY, R4 ASSISTANT ENGINEER(CIVIL), UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶50

**(ADDITIONAL R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 09/01/2015 IN IA 345/15)*

¶51

BY ADVS. R1 TO R3 - SRI. MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., STANDING COUNSEL

¶52

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶53

¶54

ADDL. R4 - SRI.T.B.HOOD SMT.M.ISHA

¶55

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05-11-2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).20814/2012(B), WP(C).21439/2012(D), WP(C).35250/2016(E), THE COURT ON 11-12-2019 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶56

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16 7

¶57

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶58

PRESENT

¶59

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶60

WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 20TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941 WP(C).No.35250 OF 2016

¶61

PETITIONER/S:

¶62

REKHA P., AGED 46 YEARS, ASSISTANT ENGINEER (CIVIL), UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, ENGINEERING SERVICE, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., PIN 673 635.

¶63

BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.MUHAMMED DR. K.M.GEORGE KUM.CHITHRA P.GEORGE SRI.MATHEWS P.GEORGE

¶64

RESPONDENT/S:

¶65

1 THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, REPRESENTED BY THE REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., PIN: 673 635.

¶66

2 THE VICE-CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., PIN: 673 635. 3 KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004.

¶67

4 JAYAN PADASSERRY, ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, ENGINEERING SERVICE, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., PIN: 673 635.

¶68

5 SIVADASAN K., ASSISTANT ENGINEER (CIVIL), UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, ENGINEERING SERVICE, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., PIN: 673 635.

¶69

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶70

¶71

BY ADVS. R1 & R2 - SRI.MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., SC, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT R3 - SRI. P.C. SASIDHARAN, SC R4 - SRI. T.B. HOOD SMT.M.ISHA SRI.AMAL KASHA R5 - SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH SMT.K.P.GEETHA MANI

¶72

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05-11-2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).20814/2012(B), WP(C).21439/2012(D), WP(C).658/2015(F), THE COURT ON 11-12-2019 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶73

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶74

¶75

JUDGMENT

¶76

The captioned writ petitions are materially connected in respect of promotion to the post of

¶77

Assistant Executive Engineer in the Calicut University on the basis of claims raised by the Diploma holders and Degree holders. Therefore, I heard them together and propose to deliver this common judgment.

¶78

W.P.(C) Nos.20814 and 21439 of 2012 are filed

¶79

by diploma holders, whereas, the other two writ petitions are filed by Degree holders. In this context, it is to be noted that petitioner in W.P.(C) No.35250 of 2016 is the 6^th respondent in the said writ petition and the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.21439 of 2012 is the 5^th respondent. For the disposal of the writ petitions, the facts and documents available in W.P.(C) No.20814 of 2012 are relied upon and the decision in the said writ petition will decide the fate of the other writ petitions also. Basic material facts for the disposal of the writ petition are as follows:

¶80

Petitioner was directly recruited as Overseer Grade-I under the service of the University on 15.11.1996 and promoted as Assistant Engineer on 17.06.2000. He possesses the academic qualification of

¶81

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶82

¶83

Diploma in Civil Engineering, and considering his

¶84

seniority and qualification, he was promoted as Assistant Executive Engineer on 07.05.2011. According to the petitioner, the method of appointment and the qualification, age limit, appointing authority and method of recruitment are included as item No.135 in the University First Ordinance. In so far as the 4^th respondent is concerned, i.e., the petitioner in W.P. (C) No.658/15, he was directly recruited to the post of Assistant Engineer on 30.08.2005 and admittedly, he is junior to the petitioner in the cadre of Assistant Engineer.

¶85

While the petitioner was holding the post of Assistant Executive Engineer, he was served with a memo on 16.04.2012, enclosing therewith a copy of the appeal petition submitted by the 4^th respondent, seeking to quash the promotion given to the petitioner. Thereupon, petitioner submitted a detailed explanation bringing to the notice of the University that the application of the general rules or special rules is limited to the extent to which no express provision is made in the University Statutes or Ordinances, and that the University Ordinance does not prescribe any ratio

¶86

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶87

¶88

between graduates and non-graduates. Therefore, the

¶89

reliance placed by the 4^th respondent to the special

¶90

rules governing the Kerala Engineering Service has no relevance.

¶91

It was also brought to the notice of the

¶92

University that on an earlier occasion in a similar issue the University has taken a definite stand that the University Ordinance governs the field and that the

¶93

special rules governing the Kerala Engineering Service

¶94

(Civil and General Branch) has application with reference to qualification and not with reference to the method of appointment. It is also the case

¶95

projected by the petitioner that the Calicut University First Ordinance stipulates only qualification as in

¶96

Government Service and not method of recruitment. However, the Syndicate and the University in its meeting held on 04.09.2012 has taken a decision to quash the promotion granted to the petitioner and to promote the 4^th respondent to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer. It is also submitted that, the

¶97

promotion given to the petitioner was approved by the Vice Chancellor, who is the appointing authority, evident from the order itself. Therefore, the findings

¶98

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶99

¶100

otherwise is unsustainable. So also, a legal contention is raised that since Statute 53(1) of the First Statutes of the University does not contemplate an appeal to the Syndicate, the Syndicate is incompetent to decide an appeal.

¶101

concerned, the said petitioner is not making any specific claims so far as his promotion is concerned. But the said writ petition is filed in order to provide aid and support to the petitioner in the writ petition discussed. Therein also, petitioner seeks to quash the

¶102

two orders of the University of Calicut dated 07.09.2012, cancelling the promotion granted to the petitioner and promoting Sri. Saheer Babu K.T., the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.658 of 2015. In that view of the matter, separate discussion of facts in that regard is not required. However, reference may be required

¶103

with respect to the documents produced by the petitioner therein also.

¶104

contentions put forth by the Graduate Engineers, the facts, circumstances and documents in W.P.(C) No.658 of

¶105

2015 are relied upon. The petitioner therein is

¶106

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶107

¶108

working as Assistant Executive Engineer in the

¶109

University and the writ petition is filed being aggrieved by the action initiated by the Vice Chancellor of the University to cancel the promotion granted to the said petitioner as Assistant Executive Engineer. In fact, against the cancellation order, an

¶110

interim order of stay was granted by this Court on 09.01.2015, which was extended until further orders on 03.09.2015.

¶111

It was against the promotion granted by the University to Sri. Jayan Padasseri, the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.20814 of 2012, i.e., the petitioner herein,

¶112

preferred appeal before the Syndicate of the University as provided under Statute 53, Chapter 4 of the Calicut University First Statutes, 1977. The cancellation orders of the promotion granted to Jayan Padasseri as Assistant Executive Engineer dated 07.09.2012, which is

¶113

the subject matter of the writ petitions filed by the Diploma holders are produced as Exts.P1 and P2. According to the petitioner, dispute arose between the members of the Syndicate on one hand and the Vice Chancellor and the Pro-Vice Chancellor on the other hand over the manner in which they are taking and

¶114

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶115

¶116

implementing the decisions of the Syndicate, without consulting or seeking the concurrence of the Syndicate. It is also submitted that, Sri. Sivadasan K. and Smt. Rekha P. who are petitioners in the connected writ petitions specified above, stake claims for being promoted as Assistant Executive Engineer in the retirement vacancy of one Abdul Majeed E.K., which arose on 30.11.2013, produced as Ext.P3. Sri. Jayan Padasseri had not staked his claim for being promoted

¶117

to the vacancy, since the claim is pending consideration in W.P.(C) No.20814 of 2012 discussed above.

¶118

Ext.P3 communication dated 28.11.2013 was put up before the Section concerned and as per a Note dated 12.03.2014 opined that in view of the ratio of 3:1 required to be followed for promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer from among the Degree and Diploma holders as decided by the Syndicate in its resolution 2012.845, the Registrar agreed to the same as per Ext.P4 Note dated 20.04.2014 and opined that Smt. Rekha P. was to be promoted as Assistant Executive Engineer. Pursuant thereto, both the Vice Chancellor and the Pro-vice Chancellor as per their Notes dated

¶119

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶120

¶121

04.05.2014 and 05.05.2014 pointed out that the matter

¶122

may “wait”, which is produced as Ext.P5.

¶123

It is also pointed out that, in accordance

¶124

with the clarification sought for by the Pro-Vice Chancellor, the Section as per Note 28, stated that as per the provisions of the Calicut University First Ordinance, Sri. Jayan Padasseri was seniormost in the feeder category of Assistant Engineer. However, the Assistant Registrar as per his Note No.30 dated 05.12.2014 pointed out that following the Syndicate decision promoting Saheer Babu K.T. as AEE, Smt. Rekha P. was to be promoted as AEE. The said Notes bearing

¶125

Nos. 25, 26, 28 and 30 are produced as Ext.P6.

¶126

According to the petitioner, in the meanwhile, the Vice Chancellor and the Pro-Vice Chancellor decided to consider Sri. Jayan Padasseri to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer as per the submission dated 15.10.2014 and on the very same day called for the records, evident from Ext.P7, which was incorporated into the files on 29.11.2014.

¶127

Thereupon, the Registrar vide Note No.34 dated 20.12.2014, directed the section concerned to verify

¶128

and report inter alia as to whether the prior

¶129

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶130

¶131

promotions as Assistant Engineer were in order and

¶132

sought for strict implementation of the quota rule,

¶133

evident from Ext.P8. The remarks sought for as per

¶134

Ext.P8 were replied by the section concerned as per Ext.P9 Note dated 30.12.2014, pointing out that the Ordinance was the “parent legislation” of the

¶135

University. The file was put up before the Registrar as per Ext.P10 dated 30.12.2014.

¶136

According to the petitioner, even before the

¶137

Registrar had an opportunity to go through Ext.P10 note put up before him, the Vice Chancellor opined as per Note 43 dated 30.12.2014 that the decision of the

¶138

Syndicate produced as Exts.P1 and P2 dated 07.09.2012 was “null and void”, and it was in violation of the

¶139

Ordinances, promotion was cancelled, and therefore, irregular and untenable, demanding correction. It was

¶140

further noted that, Sri. Jayan Padasseri was denied promotion due to hasty and erroneous procedures adopted by the Syndicate, and therefore, it was recommended that Sri. Jayan Padasseri be promoted as Assistant

¶141

Executive Engineer as per Ext.P11 Note dated 31.12.2014. It was apprehending that the Vice

¶142

Chancellor and the Pro-Vice Chancellor are taking hasty

¶143

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶144

¶145

steps to cancel the promotion granted to the petitioner

¶146

vide Exts.P1 and P2 and revert him as Assistant Engineer, the said writ petition is filed.

¶147

So far as the writ petition filed by Smt. Rekha P., a graduate Engineer is concerned, she seeks to promote her as Assistant Executive Engineer in accordance with Ext.P1 seniority list as on 02.04.2011, formulated by and between the Degree holders and the Diploma holders, wherein her name appears as Rank No.4 among Degree holders.

¶148

In view of the discussions made above in

¶149

respect of the issue raised by the petitioners who are vice versa respondents in the writ petitions, I am not traversing through the counter affidavits filed by the writ petitioners. However, the counter affidavit filed by the University in W.P.(C) No.21439 of 2012 is relevant to be discussed, since the entire issues that are under dispute are answered in the said counter affidavit, which alone is sufficient to deal with the matter. Of course, as per the counter affidavit, the University is supporting the contentions put forth by the Degree holders.

¶150

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶151

¶152

Among others, it is submitted that, as per the Calicut University First Ordinance, 1978, the method of recruitment to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer is by promotion from the cadre of Assistant Engineer based on seniority and qualification, and not merely based on seniority. It is submitted that, 150 posts are included in the schedule of non-teaching service in Chapter XV of Calicut University First Ordinance, 1978, based on the approval by the Senate on 31.03.2001 and assented by Chancellor on 14.09.2004. Out of these 150 posts, promotion is a method of recruitment for 66 posts. Out of these 66 posts, method of recruitment for 20 posts is based on seniority and qualification. All these 20 posts belong to technical category. Therefore, according to the University, if seniority was the only criterion, there was no emphasis to the qualification and the method of recruitment would have been “by promotion based on seniority” as prescribed for the balance 46 posts out of the above 66.

¶153

Therefore, on an evaluation of the schedule to the Ordinance as a whole, it would reveal that the promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer is based on both seniority and qualification possessed

¶154

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶155

¶156

by the incumbents. The qualification possessed by the incumbents have to be taken into account for the posts where method of recruitment is based on qualification and seniority. But for other cases, appointment can be made based on seniority from the incumbents with minimum qualification as Ordinance prescribes promotion “based on seniority”. An example is cited, whereby it is submitted that, for the appointment of Section Officer, University Degree is the minimum qualification and as such, in the method of recruitment it is stated that: “based on seniority” and not 'based on seniority and qualification', as in the case of Assistant Executive Engineer. Therefore, according to the University, it is evident from the Ordinance that qualification possessed by the incumbents have to be taken into account for appointment to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer.

¶157

It is also submitted that, as per Sec.23(ii) of Calicut University Act, 1975, Syndicate is the authority to make Ordinance and amend or repeal the same. As per Sec.36(d) of Act, 1975, Syndicate is the authority to make Ordinance for the fixation of scale of pay of various posts in the University and the terms

¶158

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶159

¶160

and conditions of service of officers of the University. If any issue regarding interpretation of any provision on the Ordinance occurs, it is the Syndicate which is the competent authority to take a decision and clarify on such matters, since it is the authority to do so. The amended Ordinance was promulgated by the Syndicate on 28.03.2001, which was placed in the Senate and approved by the Senate on 31.03.2001 and thereafter assented by Chancellor on 14.09.2004, evident from Ext.R1(a).

¶161

Therefore, the sum and substance of the

¶162

contention of the University is that, the issue of making promotion in the ratio as prescribed in special rules Part-III of KS&SSR was debated on an earlier occasion and the Syndicate in its meeting held on 26.08.1998 resolved to strictly follow the provisions in KS&SSR in the appointment of various posts in the Engineering Department, evident from Ext.R1(b). The post of Assistant Executive Engineer was initially included as item no.59 in the schedule of the Calicut University First Ordinance, 1978, and in order to properly understand the claims raised by the parties, it is better that the Ordinance prior to the amendment

¶163

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶164

¶165

is extracted:

¶166

Sl. No.	Category/ post	Scale of pay	Appointing Authority	Method of recruitment.
	Assistant			By promotion
	Engineer			from the
	(later on			cadre Junior
	re-		Vice-	Engineer/
59	designated as Assistant	560- 1200	Chancellor	Head Draftsman
	Executive Engineer)			(Later on re- designated as Assistant Engineer) based on seniority.

¶167

Therefore, the sum and substance of the contention is that, the minimum qualification required for the Assistant Engineer for consideration for promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer in accordance with the special rules is: (i) Degree in Engineering (Civil or Mechanical), or equivalent thereto and three years service as Assistant Engineer; (ii) Diploma in Civil or Mechanical Engineering or equivalent thereto and 7 years service; and (iii) S.M.T Overseer certificate and 25 years total service of which 12 ½ years must be as Assistant Engineer. Therefore, it is submitted that, there exist 3 different classes of Assistant Engineers to be considered for promotion to the post of Assistant

¶168

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶169

¶170

Executive Engineer based on seniority and qualification they possess.

¶171

Since the provision made regarding method of recruitment to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer in the amended Calicut University First Ordinance, 1978 does not lay down any criteria for promotion when both seniority and qualification possessed by the incumbents are taken into account for granting promotion. It is also pointed out that, as per Statute 2, Part-I, Chapter 4 of Calicut University First Statutes, 1977, it is clearly specified that: “subject to the provisions of the Act and Statutes issued thereunder, the KS&SSR, 1958, the KSR, 1959 and the Government Service Conduct Rules, 1960 as amended from time to time in so far as may be applicable and except to the extent expressly provided for in these Statutes, shall apply in the matter of all service conditions of the University employees in University Service”. Based on the same, it is submitted that, Part-III KS&SSR and the special rules, for Kerala Engineering Service dated 17.05.1965 is made applicable to the University Service. Therefore, it is contended that the stand adopted by the Graduate Engineers is in accordance with

¶172

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶173

¶174

law, and therefore, the contention put forth by the Diploma holders cannot be sustained under law.

¶175

I have heard respective counsel appearing for

¶176

the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the University and perused the pleadings and the

¶177

documents on record.

¶178

Advocate Sri. T.B.Hood advanced arguments on the side of the Diploma holders and basically invited my attention to the Calicut University Act, 1975, in order to explain the powers conferred on various statutory authorities like, Senate, Syndicate and the Academic Council and the implications of the Statutes, Ordinances, Regulations, Rules and bye-laws. The powers of the Syndicate are referred to in Sec.23 of Act, 1975, which stipulates that, “subject to the provisions of this Act and the Statutes, the executive powers of the University including the general

¶179

superintendence and control over the institutions of

¶180

the University shall be vested in the Syndicate and subject likewise the Syndicate shall have the powers; namely: (i) to affiliate institutions in accordance with the terms and conditions of such affiliation prescribed in this Act and the Statutes; (ii) to make

¶181

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶182

¶183

Ordinance and to amend or repeal the same, and other

¶184

powers are also conferred, however, they are not required to be discussed in order to consider the issues at hand.

¶185

Chapter V of Act, 1975 deals with Statutes,

¶186

Ordinances, Regulations, Rules and Bye-laws. Section

¶187

34 deals with the Statutes, which prescribes that: “subject to the provisions of this Act, the Statutes may provide for all or any of the following matters”,

¶188

(a) to (e) are relevant, in order to identify the purport and requirement of the Statutes, which read thus:-

¶189

“(a) the powers and duties of the officers of the University, not specifically provided for in this Act;

¶190

(b) the constitution, power and duties of the authorities of the University, not specifically provided for in this Act;

¶191

(c) the procedure for election of members of the Senate, the Syndicate, the Academic Council and other authorities of the University and all such other matters relating to these bodies, as may be necessary or desirable to provide;

¶192

(d) award of degrees, diplomas, titles, certificates and other academic distinctions by the University.

¶193

(e) the withdrawal or cancellation of degrees, diplomas, titles, certificates and other academic distinctions.”

¶194

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶195

¶196

The other provisions also show that, powers are conferred to make Statute for similar purposes. Subclause (k) is a residuary power conferred, which stipulates that: “all other matters which by this Act are to be, or may be, prescribed by Statutes”.

¶197

It is also relevant to note in this regard, clause (a) to Sec.34, reads that: “the powers and duties of the officers of the University, not specifically provided for in this Act”. Section 36 of the Act, 1975 deals with Ordinances, which stipulates that, “subject to the provisions of this Act and the Statutes, the Syndicate shall have power to make Ordinances providing for all or any of the following matters. Clause (d) is relevant to the context, which read thus:

¶198

“(d) the fixation of the scales of pay of various posts in the University and the terms and conditions of service of officers of the University; and clause (e) stipulates that, “all other matters which by this Act or the Statutes are to be, or may be, provided for by the Ordinances”. Therefore, learned counsel has invited my attention to Sec.82 of Act, 1975, which stipulates that: “Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, the first Statutes and the first Ordinances of the University shall be made by the Government”.

¶199

The Calicut University First Statutes, 1977

¶200

was promulgated in supersession of all Statutes by the

¶201

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶202

¶203

Government of Kerala as per S.R.O No.560/77 dated 07.06.1977 and the Calicut University First Ordinance was promulgated by the Government of Kerala as per S.R.O No.785/78 dated 15.07.1978 in accordance with the powers conferred under Sec.82 of Act, 1975. Chapter-XV of the First Ordinances, 1978 deals with Scales of Pay, Qualification etc. of Various Posts in the University. Clause 3 deals with Schedule of non teaching service, which read thus:

¶204

“ 3. Schedule of non teaching service :

¶205

(1) The scales of pay, minimum qualifications, age limit, the appointing authority and method of recruitment to the posts specified in column (1) of the Schedule given hereunder shall be as prescribed in the corresponding entries in columns 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 respectively thereof.

¶206

(2) Each scale of pay shall carry the increment at such rate as may be prescribed by the Syndicate.

¶207

(3) No person shall be appointed to a post unless he possesses the minimum educational and other qualifications prescribed therefor:

¶208

Provided that in the case of employees who were in permanent service on the dates on which the Ordinances or portions thereof made under the Kerala University Act, 1957 came into operation, the Syndicate may relax the qualification on the merits of each case.”

¶209

Category-S deals with Engineering Wing (Civil).

¶210

Sl.Nos.132 to 135 deals with Overseer Grade-II, Overseer Grade-I, Assistant Engineer (Civil) and

¶211

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶212

¶213

Assistant Executive Engineer respectively, which read

¶214

thus:

¶215

Sl.	Category/	Scale	Minimum		Appointing	Method of
No. 132	post Overseer Gr.II/Drafts man Gr.II	of pay 3590- 5400	Quali- fication As in Govt. Service (P.W.D)	Age Limit Not more than 35 years	Authority Vice- Chancellor	recruitment. 1.By promotion from the cadre of Work Supdt./Trace r on the basis of seniority and qualificatio n. 2.If no qualified hand, by direct recruitment.
133	Overseer Gr.I/Draftsm an Gr.I	4600- 7125	As in Govt. Service (P.W.D)	Not more than 35 years	Vice- Chancellor	1.By promotion from the cadre of Overseer/Dra ftsman Gr.II on the basis of seniority and qualificatio n. 2.If no qualified hand, by direct recruitment. 1.By promotion from the cadre of
134	Assistant Engineer (Civil)	6675- 10550	As in Govt. Service (P.W.D)	Not more than 35 years	Vice- Chancellor	Overseer/Dra ftsman Gr.I on the basis of seniority and qualificatio n.

¶216

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶217

¶218

				OR 2.By direct recruitment on the basis of merit inviting applications by advertisemen t in the press.
				By promotion from the cadre of Assistant
135 Assistant Executive Engineer	7450- 11475	As in Govt. Service (P.W.D) Not more than 35 years	Vice- Chancellor	Engineer on the basis of seniority and qualificatio n. In the absence of qualified hand by direct recruitment.

¶219

Therefore, relying upon the minimum qualification specified thereunder, it is submitted by learned counsel that, so far as the qualification is concerned, it is in accordance with the service of the Public Works Department and so far as the method of recruitment is concerned, the Ordinance by itself prescribes a modality by promotion from the cadre of Assistant Engineer on the basis of seniority and qualification, and in the absence of qualified hand by direct recruitment.

¶220

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶221

¶222

Therefore, it is the submission of the learned

¶223

counsel that the issue with respect to adherence to the

¶224

special rules is confined only to the minimum qualification and not in respect of the method of recruitment. It is also submitted that, Sri. Jayan Padasseri is the seniormost Assistant Engineer in the service of the Calicut University entitled to be promoted to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer, and the issue with respect to the qualification arises only if the seniority and qualification of Diploma holder and Degree holder is similar and equal, and therefore, according to the counsel, there is no factual or legal basis for the contention put forth by the degree holders.

¶225

Advocate Sri. S. Ramesh appearing for the

¶226

petitioner in W.P.(C) No.21439 of 2012, viz., Sri. K. Sivadasan has fully supported the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner Sri. Jayan Padasseri.

¶227

However, Dr. K.M. George learned counsel

¶228

appearing for the Degree holders basically relied upon the Calicut University First Statutes, 1977 and has invited my attention to Chapter-IV dealing with the

¶229

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶230

¶231

terms and conditions of service of the Non-Teaching Staff of the Calicut University other than University Teachers. Statute 1 deals with the applicability of the chapter, which stipulates that: “subject to the provisions of this Act, this Chapter shall apply to all employees of the University, other than teachers”.

¶232

Statute 2 deals with the applicability of the Kerala Service Rules etc. to the non-teaching staff, which stipulates that: “subject to the provisions of the Act and the Statutes issued thereunder, the Kerala State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1958, the Kerala Service Rules, 1959 and the Government Servant Conduct Rules, 1960 as amended from time to time in so far as may be applicable and except to the extent expressly provided for in these Statutes, shall apply in the matter of all the service conditions of the University employees in the University service”.

¶233

Relying upon the said provision, it is

¶234

submitted that, the special rules i.e., Part-III KS&SSR applicable to the Kerala Engineering Service will apply to the employees of the University other than teachers and in accordance with the same, the ratio is to be applied by and between the degree holders and the

¶235

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶236

¶237

diploma holders, and if such ratio is applied as per the special rules, then, Jayan Padasseri and K. Sivadasan, even though they were appointed as Overseer prior to the appointment of degree holders as Assistant Engineers, they are not entitled to be appointed to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer.

¶238

Advocate Sri. Navneeth Krishnan also advanced arguments relying upon the said provisions and supporting the case of the degree holders. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the degree holders

¶239

that, by virtue of the decisions taken by the Syndicate, the Ordinances have no bearing at all and

¶240

the decisions of the Syndicate is to be given predominance to any decisions taken by the Vice Chancellor or Pro-Vice Chancellor and therefore, the promotion granted to Sri. Jayan Padasseri cannot be sustained under law, and the cancellation done by the University is in accordance with law.

¶241

I have evaluated the rival submissions made across the Bar and appreciated the factual and legal circumstances put forth through pleadings and at the time of arguments. In my considered opinion, the consideration of the questions raised revolve around a

¶242

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶243

¶244

very narrow compass. To understand the situation properly, it is better that the relevant provisions of the Kerala Engineering Service Rules issued by the Government dated 17.05.1965 is discussed. The service consists of various categories and category No.4 deals with Assistant Executive Engineers (including Junior Workshop Superintendent, Dredger Superintendent and General Foreman). The method of appointment is dealt with under Rule 3. Category 4 thereunder deals with Assistant Executive Engineers, which stipulates that, the method of appointment is by recruitment by transfer from Assistant Engineers of Kerala Engineering Subordinate Service. Clause (b) thereunder stipulates that, promotions and appointments by transfer shall be made from select lists of eligible officers prepared on the basis of merit and ability, seniority being

¶245

considered only where merit and ability are

¶246

approximately equal. Persons included in a select list shall be ranked in the order of their seniority. Rule 4(a) deals with the qualifications, which stipulates that, no person shall be eligible for appointment to the category mentioned in column (1) of the table below unless he possess the qualifications prescribed in the

¶247

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶248

¶249

corresponding entry in column (2) thereof. The table

¶250

read thus:

¶251

Category	Qualif	ications
(1)	(	2)
Superintending Engineers	Must possess any mentioned in item under item (ii) in	degree or diploma (i) or in section A the Annexure.
Executive Engineers	Must possess any mentioned in item under item (ii) in	degree or diploma (i) or in section A the Annexure.
Assistant Executive Engineers	Must possess any mentioned in item Annexure. Must possess Drafts the College of Eng year course) or Certificate and m	degree or diploma (i) or (ii) in the OR man's Certificate of ineering, Guindy (2 S.M.T Overseer's ust have put in a
	total service of Department out of w be as Assistant Eng	25 years in the hich 12 ½ years must ineer.

¶252

The Note thereunder is also relevant, which

¶253

read thus:

¶254

“ Note :-In the case of S.M.T Certificate holders and of those possessing Draftsman's Certificate of the College of Engineering, Guindy for the purpose of calculating the 25 years of total service, continuous Work Establishment service, if any, put in by such persons shall also be reckoned subject to the condition that this shall not affect the claims of any of the senior of such persons in the category of Assistant Engineers (as amended as per G.O. (MS.)No.98/70/PW dated 18.06.1970.

¶255

(b) No person shall be eligible for promotion as Executive Engineer unless he has rendered satisfactory service as Assistant Executive Engineer for a period of not less than three years.

¶256

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶257

¶258

(c) Not more than 5% of the posts in the cadre of Executive Engineers shall be reserved to be filled by selection from among Assistant Executive Engineers (as amended by G.O.(MS)77/73 PW dated 10.04.1973)

¶259

(1) Who possess the qualifications mentioned sub item (a) of section-B in item (ii) in the Annexure; and

¶260

(2) Who have rendered Service under Government for not less than 20 years of which at least 5 years should be in the category of Assistant Executive Engineers:

¶261

Provided that an Assistant Executive Engineer who possesses the qualifications mentioned in this sub-rule shall not be eligible for promotion over a senior graduate Assistant Executive Engineer unless the latter is otherwise rendered ineligible for promotion to the post of Executive Engineers against the vacancies under this sub-rule (as amended by G.O.(MS)253/PW dated 25.11.1966).

¶262

(d) An Assistant Engineer shall not be eligible for appointment as Assistant Executive Engineer unless

¶263

(i) He has rendered Service under Government for a total period of not less than 3 years and possesses the qualification mentioned in item (1) or Section A in item (ii) of the Annexure or

¶264

(ii) He has rendered service under Government for a total period of note less than 7 years and possesses any Diploma specified in Section B in item (ii) of the Annexure.

¶265

Notes:--Only those Assistant Engineers who have passed the Account Test (Lower), Kerala P.W.D. Manual Test, (as amended by G.O. (P)152/77/PW dated 17.09.1977) and the Kerala P.W.D Test shall be eligible for appointment as Assistant Executive Engineers:

¶266

Provided, however, that this will not apply to the Assistant Engineers who have attained the age of 50 years of service under Government.

¶267

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶268

¶269

(This note shall be deemed to have come into force on the 31^st March, 1959).”

¶270

Rule 5 thereto deals with promotion of

¶271

Executive Engineer and Assistant Executive Engineers. Clause (a) stipulates that, “a person who obtains the A.M.I.E (India) Diploma or a pass in Sections A & B of the A.M.I.E of the Institution of Engineers (India) in Civil or Mechanical Engineering after appointment as Assistant Executive Engineer shall be eligible for promotion as Executive Engineer only after the claim of

¶272

all Assistant Executive Engineers who on the date of his obtaining the A.M.I.E (India) Diploma or pass in Sections A & B of the A.M.I.E of the Institution of Engineers (India) in Civil or Mechanical Engineering possessed the qualifications mentioned in item (i)and

¶273

Section A in item (ii) in the Annexure have been considered”. Clause (b) thereunder stipulates that, vacancies in the category of Assistant Executive Engineer shall be filled up from among Assistant Engineers in the ratio of 75:20:5 respectively from among (1) Persons possessing any of the qualifications mentioned in item (I) or in Section A in item (ii) of

¶274

the Annexure and (2) Those possessing any of the qualifications mentioned in Section-B in item (ii) of

¶275

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶276

¶277

the Annexure. (3) Those possessing the Draftsman's Certificate of the College of Engineering, Guindy or S.M.T Overseer Certificate. It further stipulates that, a person who while holding the post of Assistant Engineers passes Sections A and B of the A.M.I.E (India) Examination or a Degree in Engineering of a recognized University, shall be eligible for promotion as Assistant Executive Engineer against the quota allotted for those possessing the qualifications mentioned in item (I) or Section A in item (ii) of the Annexure only after the claims of all those who on the date of his passing the A.M.I.E (India) Examination or

¶278

a Degree in Engineering of a recognized University, possessed the qualification mentioned in item (I) in

¶279

the Annexure have been considered. The Annexure deals

¶280

with the Degree in Engineering and Diploma in Engineering which read thus:

¶281

“(i) Degree in Engineering

¶282

B.Sc. Degree in Engineering (Civil or Mechanical) of the Kerala University, B.E. Degree (Civil or Mechanical) of the Madras University or any other qualification recognised as equivalent thereto.

¶283

The Diploma in Civil Engineering or Mechanical Engineering of the College of Engineering, Guindy, which was abolished in 1945 will be treated as equivalent to a Degree.

¶284

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶285

¶286

(ii) Diploma in Engineering

¶287

SECTION A

¶288

(a) Associate Membership Diploma of the Institution of Engineering (India) in Civil or Mechanical Engineering or any other Diploma recognised as equivalent thereto.

¶289

(b) Pass in Sections A and B of the Associate Membership Examination of the Institution of Engineers (India) in Civil or Mechanical Engineering.

¶290

SECTION B

¶291

(a) Upper Subordinate Diploma of the College of Engineering, Guindy.

¶292

(b) Diploma in Civil or Mechanical Engineering of the Travancore (now Kerala) University or Diploma recognised by Government as equivalent thereto.

¶293

(c) Lower Subordinate Diploma of the College of Engineering, Guindy.

¶294

(d) Licentiate in Civil or Mechanical Engineering from the Technical Institute at Kozhikode, Trichur, Kalamassery or other equal courses.”

¶295

Now, coming back to the provisions of the

¶296

Calicut University Act, 1975 and the First Statutes,

¶297

1977, it is important to note Statute 7 under Chapter

¶298

4, dealing with the Scales of pay, qualification, method of recruitment etc., and prescribes that, “The

¶299

scales of pay of the various posts in the University shall be such as may be prescribed by the Ordinances”. Therefore, one thing is clear, the First Statutes, 1977

¶300

clearly states that the qualifications and the method

¶301

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶302

¶303

of recruitment shall only be in accordance with the prescriptions contained under the Ordinances. Statute 8 thereunder deals with Recruitment to posts which stipulates that: “Recruitment to posts shall be made on the basis of the recommendation made by a Selection Board consisting of the Vice Chancellor or Pro-Vice Chancellor as Chairman, Convener of the Standing Committee of the Syndicate on Finance and two other

¶304

members of the Syndicate nominated by the Vice

¶305

Chancellor from time to time. The Registrar shall be the Secretary to the Board, Quorum for the meeting of the Selection Board shall be three including the Chairman. The Board may conduct such tests as are deemed necessary to determine the suitability of

¶306

candidates for appointment. It may also fix the rate of fee for admission to tests. In making appointments by direct recruitment to posts of non-teaching staff in

¶307

the University, the University shall observe the provisions of clauses (a), (b) and (c) of Rule 14 and rules 15, 16 and 17 of the Kerala State and Subordinate

¶308

Services Rules, 1958 as amended from time to time.

¶309

Therefore, on an analysis of Statutes 7 and 8,

¶310

it is clear that, Statute 8 deals with recruitment to

¶311

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶312

¶313

posts so far as the Non-Teaching Staff of the Calicut University is concerned, however, the qualification and the method of recruitment is in accordance with the prescriptions contained under the Ordinances. To put it otherwise, what is contemplated under Statute 2 of Chapter 4 of First Statutes, 1977 is that the applicability of the Kerala Service Rules, KS&SSR etc. etc. to the non-teaching staff is confining to the powers conferred under Statute 8 of the First Statutes, 1977. In this context, Sections 34 and 36 of Act, 1975 are relevant, because thereunder it is made clear that the powers of the Syndicate to make Statutes and Ordinances are subject to the provisions of the Act. Therefore, by virtue of Sec.82 of Act, 1975, only the Government is vested with powers to make the First Statutes and First Ordinances. Which thus also means, whatever powers conferred on the Syndicate to make Statutes and Ordinances is only subject to the powers of the Government in respect of the First Statutes and Ordinances. So much so, the power of the Government to do so is omnibus, which is exemplified from the nonobstante clause contained under Sec.82, which read thus: “Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act,

¶314

¶315

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶316

the first Statutes and the first Ordinances of the University shall be made by the Government”. It is also not under dispute that the Vice-Chancellor is the appointing authority in accordance with the First Ordinances. In view of the findings rendered above, all actions of the Syndicate contrary to the provisions of law discussed above in the matter of diploma holders vis-a-vis the degree holders also cannot be sustained under law, and they are all held to be bad.

¶317

Now the issue boils down to only one question, i.e., how the method of recruitment prescribed under category No.135 to the First Ordinances, 1978 is to be tackled. In my considered opinion, the question with respect to the prescription of qualification and

¶318

seniority in the matter of method of recruitment can only be interpreted to mean; when the seniority being equal, the qualification of the degree holders may weigh. However, in the case on hand, it is clear that Sri. Jayan Padasseri as well as Sri. K. Sivadasan were appointed in the Engineering wing of the Calicut University much prior to the appointment of Sri. Saheer Babu K.T. as well as Smt. Rekha P., as Assistant Engineers directly, and so also, they were promoted to

¶319

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶320

¶321

the post of Assistant Engineer prior to the degree holders named above. Looking from that angle, the diploma holders senior in the post of Assistant Engineers are entitled for promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer, if they have the minimum qualification as prescribed by the Kerala Engineering Service Rules, as adopted to the schedule of First Ordinances, 1978. Moreover, the degree holders are not having a case that the petitioners/diploma holders are not having the minimum qualification as prescribed in the Special Rules. It is also clear from the schedule that, what is adopted from the Special Rules is only the minimum qualification and not the method of recruitment.

¶322

In this regard, it is also interesting to note that, the method of recruitment to the post of Overseer Grade-I and the Assistant Engineer is also by promotion from the respective cadres on the basis of seniority and qualification and the promotion so given to the petitioner/diploma holders were/or are not under challenge. Furthermore, the ratio of the Special Rules cannot be applied because under the Special Rules, there are three categories for promotion to the

¶323

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶324

¶325

Assistant Engineer, whereas under the First Ordinances,

¶326

there are two categories only.

¶327

So also, it is quite clear and evident that the First Ordinances, 1978 is promulgated by the State Government as per S.R.O No.785/78 dated 15.07.1978. In that view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that, the contention put forth by the Diploma holders viz., Sri. Jayan Padasseri and Sri. K. Sivadasan are to be upheld, and I hold that the decisions taken by the Syndicate of the University to cancel the appointment of Sri. Jayan Padasseri cannot be sustained under law, being arbitrary and illegal,

¶328

and therefore, the said decision as per the communications dated 07.09.2012 bearing No.Ad. A3/3571/2011 cancelling the appointment given to Sri. Jayan Padasseri as Assistant Executive Engineer are herewith quashed.

¶329

The remaining question to be considered is in respect of the power enjoyed by the Syndicate to entertain appeal as per Statute 53, Chapter 4 of the First Statutes, 1977. According to learned counsel for degree holders, the Syndicate alone is vested with powers to entertain an appeal from any order denying or

¶330

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶331

¶332

varying the conditions of service. However, since it is clear that the First Ordinances is promulgated by the Government, the Government alone is vested with powers to entertain any appeal in that regard which is explicit from clause (b) of Statute 53(1) of Chapter 4, which specifies that, a University employee may appeal against an order, if any order is passed interpreting to his disadvantage the provisions of any such laws, to any authority which made such laws.

¶333

In view of the findings rendered above, W.P. (C) No.20814 of 2012 is allowed, W.P.(C)No.21439 of 2012 is disposed of in terms of the findings in W.P.(C) No.20814 of 2012, and W.P.(C) Nos.658 of 2015 and 35250 of 2016 would stand dismissed. Consequently, necessary

¶334

steps shall be taken to regularize the service of Sri. Jayan Padasseri in accordance with law, taking into account the findings and observations contained above, at the earliest, and at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

SHAJI P.CHALY

JUDGE

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶339

¶340

¶341

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶342

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PROMOTION ORDER PROMOTING AS ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER DATED 7.5.2011.

¶343

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO DATED 16.4.2012 ALONG WITH THE APPEAL PETITION. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION DATED 30.04.2012.

¶344

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE SYNDICATE DECISION. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE ATTENDANCE REGISTER.

¶345

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE ORDER DATED 11.09.2012.

¶346

EXHIBIT P7 (1) TRUE COPY OF ORDER U.O. NO. 30/2012/FIN. DATED 26.09.2012. (2) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PROMOTING THE PETITIONER TO THE POST OF ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER DATED 31/12/2014. (IN IA 1138/2015)

¶347

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶348

EXHIBIT R1(1) TRUE COPY OF THE UNIVERSITY ORDER NO. AD. A3/357/2011 DATED 7.9.2012. EXHIBIT R1(2) TRUE COPY OF THE UNIVERSITY ORDER NO. AD. A3/3571/2011 DATED 7.9.2012 PROMOTING THE 4TH RESPONDENT AS ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER. EXHIBIT R1(3) TRUE COPY OF THE JOINING REPORT OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT AS ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER. EXHIBIT R1(4) TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE ATTENDANCE REGISTER MENTIONED IN THE AFFIDAVIT. EXHIBIT R5(A) A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. AD.A3/3571/2011 DATED 7.9.2012.

¶349

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶350

¶351

EXHIBIT R5(B)	A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. AD. A3/3571/2011 DATED 7.9.2012 WHICH WAS ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY ON 10.09.2012.
EXHIBIT R5(C)	A TRUE COPY OF THE ATTENDANCE REGISTER OF THE RELEVANT DATE.
EXHIBIT R5(D)	A TRUE COPY OF THE JOINING REPORT OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT R3(E)	A TRUE COPY OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE DATED 14.12.2013 SUBMITTED BY PRAVEEN K., KAITHAVALAPPIL HOUSE, RAMANATTUKARA P.O., CALICUT.
EXHIBIT R5(F)	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 28.12.2013 GIVEN BY THE UNIVERSITY.
EXHIBIT R5(G)	A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.6124/2013/CU DATED 29.11.2013 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY PROMOTING SRI. GOPALAKRISHNAN T., OVERSEER GR.I TO THE POST OF ASST. ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL).
EXHIBIT R6(A)	SYNDICATE DECISION ON RATIO FOR PROMOTION AMONG DEGREE AND DIPLOMA HOLDERS AS IN GOVT. SPECIAL RULES, DT. 7.9.2012.
EXHIBIT R6(B)	SENIORITY LIST, DATED 7.9.2012.
EXHIBIT R6(C)	APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE SYNDICATE, DATED 15.1.2015.
EXHIBIT R4(A)	TRUE COPY OF THE NOTE FILE.
EXHIBIT R4(B)	TRUE COPY OF THE RECOMMENDATION DATED 05.05.1998.
EXHIBIT R4(C)	TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING.

¶352

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶353

¶354

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21439/2012

¶355

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶356

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.AD.A3/11610/93 DATED 17.05.2001 ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.AD.A3/11610/93/SF. DATED 16.06.2005 ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF DEGREE CERTIFICATE DATED 25.09.2009 ISSUED BY UNIVERSITY TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.AD.A3/3571/2011 DATED 07.05.2011 ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. AD.A3/3571/2011 DATED 07.09.2012 ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. AD.A3/3571/2011 DATED 07.09.2012 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7	NIL.
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE UNIVERSITY ORDER DATED 06/03/2017 ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY.
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE NOTE PREPARED BY THE UNIVERSITY AT THE TIME OF GRANTING PROMOTION.

¶357

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶358

EXHIBIT R1(A)	PHOTOCOPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE SYNDICATE MEETING HELD ON 28.03.2001.
EXHIBIT R1(B)	PHOTOCOPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE SYNDICATE MEETING HELD ON 26.08.1998.
EXHIBIT R1(C)	PHOTOCOPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER -G.O.(MS) NO.150/65/PW DATED 17.05.1965.
EXHIBIT R1(D)	PHOTOCOPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE SYNDICATE MEETING HELD ON 16.11.2004.
EXHIBIT R1(E)	PHOTOCOPY OF THE UNIVERSITY ORDER NO.12468/2014/ADMN. DATED 31.12.2014.
EXHIBIT R3(A)	TRUE COPY OF THE RECOMMENDATION DATED 05.05.1998.

¶359

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶360

¶361

EXHIBIT R3(B)	TRUE COPY OF THE	MINUTES OF THE MEETING.
EXHIBIT R4(A)	TRUE COPY OF THE AND DIPLOMA HOLD	SENIORITY LIST FOR DEGREE ERS.
EXHIBIT R4(B)	TRUE COPY OF THE NO.AD.A3/3571/09	ORDER /2012 DATED 07.09.2012.
EXHIBIT R4(C)	TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 27.11.2013 RESPONDENT.	REQUEST FOR PROMOTION SENT BY PETITIONER/4TH
EXHIBIT R4(D)	TRUE COPY OF THE FILED BEFORE THE	APPEAL DATED 21.01.2015 SYNDICATE.
EXHIBIT R4(E)	TRUE COPY OF THE MADE BY PETITION	REQUEST DATED 15.09.2016 ER/4TH RESPONDENT.

¶362

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶363

¶364

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 658/2015

¶365

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶366

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY DATED 7.9.	OF THE ORDER NO.AD.A3/3571/2011 2012.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY DATED 7.9.	OF THE ORDER NO.AD.A3/3571/2011 2012.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY 28.11.2013	OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED .
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY 12.3.2014	OF THE NOTE#11 TO NOTE#15 DATED AND 20.4.2014
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY	OF NOTE#16 AND NOTE#17
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY AND #30.	OF THE NOTE IN NOTES#25, #26, #28
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY 15.10.2014	OF THE SUBMISSION DATED .
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY	OF NOTE#34 DATED 20.12.2014
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY	OF NOTE#40 DATED 30.12.2014
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY	OF NOTE#42 DATED 30.12.14
EXHIBIT P11	TRUE COPY 30.12.14	OF NOTE#43, 44 AND 47 DATED
EXHIBIT P12	TRUE COPY 3/2013/CU UNIVERSITY	OF THE ORDER NO.60850/AD-A-ASST- DATED 03.02.2017 PASSED BY THE .
EXHIBIT P13	TRUE COPY ADMN DATED UNIVERSITY	OF THE ORDER U.O.NO. 3116/2017 06.03.2017 PASSED BY THE .
EXHIBIT P14	TRUE COPY ADMN DATED UNIVERSITY	OF THE ORDER U.O. NO.4630/2017 31.03.2017 PASSED BY THE .

¶367

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶368

EXHIBIT R1(A)	PHOTOCOPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE SYNDICATE
	MEETING HELD ON 28/03/2001.
EXHIBIT R1(B)	PHOTOCOPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE SYNDICATE
	MEETING HELD ON 26/08/1998.

¶369

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶370

¶371

EXHIBIT R1(C) PHOTOCOPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER GO(MS) NO.150/65/PW DATED 17/05/1965. EXHIBIT R1(D) PHOTOCOPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE SYNDICATE MEETING HELD ON 16/11/2004. EXHIBIT R1(E) PHOTOCOPY OF THE UNIVERSITY ORDER NO.12468/2014/ADMN. DATED 31/12/2014.

¶372

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶373

¶374

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 35250/2016

¶375

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶376

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SENIORITY LIST FOR DEGREE AND DIPLOMA HOLDERS.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.AD A3/3571/11 DATED 07-09-2012 BY 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 27-11-2013 SENT BY PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 21-01- 2015 FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE SYNDICATE.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15-09-2016 GIVEN BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER NO.A3/8785/88/VOL. III DATED 03-02-2011 OF THE UNIVERSITY.
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF UO NO.11488/2016/ADMN. DATED 27/09/2016 INCAPACITATING ADV. P.C. SASIDHARAN TO APPEAR AS STANDING COUNSEL.
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 23/11/2015 OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL OPINION GIVEN BY ADV. P.C. SASIDHARAN, STANDING COUNSEL OF THE UNIVERSITY.
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 01/12/2016 OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION.
EXHIBIT P11	TRUE COPY OF THE NOTE FILE NO.60850/AD-A- ASST-3/2013.
EXHIBIT P12	TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL OPINION DATED 27/12/2016 OF THE STANDING COUNSEL ADV. P.C. SASIDHARAN.
EXHIBIT P13	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 27/02/2017 SUBMITTED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT BY THE WRIT PETITIONER.

¶377

W.P.(C)Nos.20814/12, 21439/12, 658/15 & 35250/16

¶378

¶379

EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. AD. A3-8185/92 (VOL.III) DATED 06/12/1996 OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT. EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE UO NO.3116/2017/ADMN. DATED 06/03/2017 ISSUED BY UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT. EXHIBIT P16 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF REPORT OF THE CALICUT UNIVERSITY COMMISSION, 2000 APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNMENT TO EVALUATE THE PERFORMANCE OF THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS OF THE CALICUT UNIVERSITY.

¶380

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL

Saheer Babu K.T. v. the University of Calicut

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saheer Babu K.T. v. the University of Calicut

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pavakkulam Sree Mahadeva Temple Vs Xavier George.N.J.

Vinay.v.N. Vs All India Council for Technical Education

Celeeshia Joseph Vs the Mahatma Gandhi University

P.v.Suhas, Vs Arjitha

Rajan Nair T.P. Vs the Secretary, Ministry of Human Resources Development

Paramedical Students Association Reg. No. KTM/DC/301/2013, Vs State of Kerala