Dismissed

Sanal Kumar K P v. Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

Kerala HC14 Sept 2022WP(C)/2542/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged the KSEBL's decision to report only 219 vacancies to the PSC for Meter Reader posts, claiming over 600 vacancies were available. The Court held that the PSC has statutory discretion to determine candidates in the shortlist based on reported vacancies and noted the employer's prerogative to fill posts.

What did the court decide?

The writ petitions were dismissed, upholding the PSC's selection process and the Board's decision regarding vacancy reporting.

Sanal Kumar K P Vs Kerala State Electricity… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 14^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 23RD BHADRA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 2542 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

SANAL KUMAR K P AGED 42 YEARS KALATHILTHAZHATH HOUSE, GURUVARYOORAPPAN COLLEGE P.O., PALAZHI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 014. BY ADVS. M.R.ANISON SMT.V.BHARGAVI (PANANGAD) SMT.P.A.RINUSA

¶8

RESPONDENT/S:

¶9

1 KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, VYDYUTHI BAHVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004. 2 KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004. 3 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. BY ADVS. SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN

¶10

OTHER PRESENT:

¶11

GP PREMCHAND R. NAIR; SC FOR KSEB K.S. ANIL

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.03.2022, THE COURT ON 14.09.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).3923/2021, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶14

-2-

¶15

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶16

PRESENT

¶17

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶18

WEDNESDAY, THE 14^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 23RD BHADRA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 3923 OF 2021

¶19

PETITIONER/S:

¶20

1 SHIBEESH .V AGED 31 YEARS S/O. KUTTY KRISHNAN V, RESIDING AT VELLAYIKOTTA HOUSE, , KADALUNDI (PO), KOZHIKODE 673 302 (MOB 9037952565) 2 MUHAMMED HANEEFA B.P, AGED 38 YEARS S/O. ABOOBACKER, RESIDING AT BHARANIPARAKKAL (H), NARIKKUNI POST, NARAKKUNI VIA, KOZHIKODE 673 585 (MOB 9846530512) BY ADVS. M.R.HARIRAJ SMT.THANUJA ROSHAN SMT.GANGA A.SANKAR SHRI.CHACKOCHEN VITHAYATHIL SMT.GISHA G. RAJ SHRI.REJIVUE SHRI.VISHNU RAJAGOPAL

¶21

RESPONDENT/S:

¶22

1 KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VAIDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 004

¶23

2 CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM) KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD, VAIDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 004

¶24

3 KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VAIDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTAM, THIRUVANANTHPURAM 695 004

¶25

4 ADDL.R4.KSEB KARAR THOZHILALI FEDERATION (KKTF) REGISTRATION NUMBER 01-21-2013, JAYA VIHAR, T.C.25/2787(4), AMBUJAVILASAM ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS

¶26

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶27

-3-

¶28

GENERAL SECRETARY, E.ABDUL LATHEEF, AGED 67 YEARS, SON OF EBRAHIMKUTTY, RESIDING AT BINU COTTAGE, CLAPPANA P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM 690 525. 5 ADDL.R5.MURALEEDHARAN.P AGED 38 YEARS SON OF P.C.PARANGODAN, METER READER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD., KIZHAKKENCHERRY ELECTRICAL SECTION, ALATHUR ELECTRICAL DIVISION, PALAKKAD 678 706, RESIDING AT PADINJARETHARA, MUDAPPALLUR P.O., PALAKKAD 678 705. 6 ADDL.R6.RATHEESH.P AGED 38 YEARS SON OF KUNHIKRISHNAN C., METER READER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD., KODIYERI ELECTRICAL SECTION, THALASSERY ELECTRICAL DIVISION, TEMPLE GATE P.O., PALAKKAD 670 102, RESIDING AT KRISHNA NIVAS, MELUR P.O., PALAKKAD 670661. 7 ADDL.R7.SURENDRAN V.V., AGED 42 YEARS SON OF KANARAN NAMBIAR, METER READER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD., THOTTIPALAM ELECTRICAL SECTION, NADHAPURAM ELECTRICAL DIVISION, KAVILAMPARA P.O., KOZHIKODE 670 102, RESIDING AT VADAKKE VILANGOTTIL, NITTOOR P.O., KAKKATTIL VIA, KOZHIKODE 673 507. ADDITIONAL R4 TO R7 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 16.03.2021 IN IA.1/2021 IN WPC 3923/2021. BY ADVS. SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN SRI.B.ASHOK SHENOY SRI.P.S.GIREESH SRI.RIYAL DEVASSY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.03.2022, THE COURT ON 14.09.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).2542/2021, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶29

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶30

-4-

¶31

JUDGMENT

¶32

Dated this the 14^th day of September, 2022

¶33

These writ petitions are filed aggrieved by

¶34

the alleged refusal of the Kerala Public Service

¶35

Commission (PSC) to publish a shortlist containing sufficient number of candidates for the post of Meter Reader/Spot Biller in the Kerala State Electricity Board Limited (KSEBL). Admittedly, the PSC has published a short list containing 632 candidates in the main list and 609 candidates in the supplementary list. According to the petitioners, there are 638 vacancies in the category of Meter Reader/Spot Biller. Hence, a short list containing three times the number of vacancies ought to be published. The essential facts are narrated hereunder, with reference to the documents

¶36

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶37

produced and marked in W.P.(C) No.3923 of 2021 .

¶38

Ext.P1 notification for the post of Meter Reader/Spot Biller was issued on 26.12.2014. About 11800 candidates, including the writ petitioners, appeared for the written test conducted on 07.04.2016. In spite of availability of large number of vacancies, the KSEBL did not report the vacancies and continued to engage contract hands for handling the work. Aggrieved by the delay in reporting vacancies, certain candidates approached this court in W.P.(C) No.30039 of 2016. After considering the rival contentions, this Court rendered Ext.P3 judgment dated 04.01.2018, directing the KSEBL to report 799 vacancies of Meter Reader to the PSC. Further, the PSC was directed to publish the short list and rank list expeditiously and advice candidates against the reported vacancies. It was also directed to disengage the contract hands, as and when advice is made from the rank

¶39

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶40

-6-

¶41

list. Immediately after the judgment, the KSEBL issued Ext.P4 order dated 23.02.2018 abolishing 799 posts of Meter Reader/Spot Biller and thereby reducing the sanctioned strength from 1721 to 922. In the meanwhile, the KSEBL had preferred Writ Appeal No.173 of 2018 against Ext.P3 judgment. On Ext.P4 order being brought to the notice of the Division Bench, Ext.P5 judgment was rendered allowing the writ appeal, taking note of the subsequent development and holding the direction in the impugned judgment, to publish the rank list in the PSC and to advice candidates to be unsustainable.

¶42

The petitioners allege that out of the 410 Meter Readers working on permanent basis, 300 were promoted as Sub Engineer (Electrical) vide Ext.P8 order dated 20.08.2020. As such only 45 persons remain in the category of Meter Reader/Spot Biller. As such, from the cadre strength of 922, 75% viz, 695 posts are

¶43

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶44

-7-

¶45

available for direct recruitment. Even if the entire 45 persons presently working in the cadre are taken to be direct recruits, there will still be 646 vacancies. However, only 219 vacancies were reported to the PSC. Although the PSC decided to publish a short list of 1000 candidates from the main list as per Ext.P10, when Ext.P11 was published on 04.01.2021, the

¶46

main list contained only 646 names. As a result the chances of appointment of the petitioners are defeated.

¶47

Advs.M.R.Hariraj and M.R.Anison, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners in the respective writ petitions, put forth the following contentions;

¶48

Indisputably, even after abolition of 799 posts of Meter Reader/Spot Biller, there are 922 posts in the category. Out of 410 Meter Readers working in the category on permanent basis, 365 were promoted as Sub Engineer (Electrical) vide

¶49

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶50

-8-

¶51

Ext.P8 order. As such, there are only 45 permanent Meter Readers. 75% of the vacancies being set apart for direct recruitment, 692 posts are available to be filled up from among the eligible candidates. Even if the entire 45 posts in which personnel are presently working is deducted from the 692 posts, there would still be 647 vacancies for direct recruitment. However, only 219 vacancies were reported to the PSC on the premise that it forms 50% of the available vacancies. The remaining vacancies are being manned by contract appointees and there is a concerted attempt to continue the service of the contract employees.

¶52

The stand of KSEBL that the deduction of posts was necessitated in view of the proposal to introduce smart prepaid meters is patently false since, even as on date not even smart prepaid meter has been installed. As a matter of fact, the KSEBL has issued Ext.P12 order dated

¶53

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶54

-9-

¶55

04.06.2021 specifying new work norms for engagement of personnel for attending duties of Meter Reader, which clearly indicates that the reason stated for not reporting the available vacancies is false. Reference is made to the

¶56

decision in State of Maharashtra v. Chandrabhan Tale [AIR 1983 SC 803] to submit that public employment is a national wealth in which all citizens have an equal share. Non-inclusion of sufficient number of candidates in the short list will have the effect of depriving qualified and eligible persons like the petitioners from being considered for appointment. Relying on State of

¶57

Punjab and others v. Manjit Singh and others [AIR

¶58

2003 SC 4580] , it is submitted that normally, the

¶59

ratio 3:5 is adopted for preparing the short list, depending upon the number of seats. The decision in Ajayan v. State of Kerala [2006 (3)

¶60

KLT 854], is pressed into service to contend that

¶61

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶62

-10-

¶63

the PSC is bound to consider the anticipated vacancies also and refix the number of persons to be called for interview on the basis of the directions in Manjit Singh ' s case.

¶64

Refuting the contentions, Adv.K.S.Anil, learned Standing Counsel for KSEBL made the following submissions;

¶65

The method of appointment to the cadre of Meter Reader/Spot Biller is regulated by Board order dated 05.10.1990, as per which 75% of the vacancies are to be filled by direct recruitment through PSC and the remaining 25%, by way of promotion from among Board employees. Consequent to the judgment in Writ Appeal No.323 of 2020 and connected cases, 365 Meter Readers were promoted to the cadre of Sub Engineer and consequently, the number of Meter Readers got reduced. With the objective of improving the operational efficiency and financial sustainability of the

¶66

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶67

-11-

¶68

distribution sector, the Government of India has approved the Revamped Distribution Sector Scheme, a reforms based and result linked scheme. One of the major interventions under the scheme is installation of prepaid smart meters. Once such meters are installed, manual meter reading will not be required and the role of convention Meter Readers would become redundant. In fact, after the introduction of the Personal Digital Assistant (PDA) itself, the job profile of Meter Reader has changed substantially. A phased reduction of existing vacancies of Meter Readers is needed prior to the introduction of smart meters, as it is expected that less than 1/3^rd of the present working strength of Meter Readers would be sufficient once the scheme materialises. Learned Counsel drew attention to the present sanctioned strength and vacancy details in the

¶69

post of Meter Reader extracted hereunder;

¶70

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶71

-12-

¶72

Total sanctioned strength of	1721
Meter Reader Prior to 23.02.2018
Less (Comp-23 PH-1, SR-5)	29
Sanctioned Strength prior to 23.02.2018	1692 (17321-29)
75% of sanctioned strength	1269
Post abolished from Direct Recruitment	799
Present sanctioned strength in Direct Recruitment	470
Present working strength	34
Openings in Direct Recruitment Quota	436
Vacancy reported to KPSC	218

¶73

It was explained that taking all factors into consideration, the Board had decided to fill up 50% of the existing direct recruitment vacancies (218 numbers). It is contended that the employer has the prerogative of deciding whether the vacancies are filled up or not and mere inclusion in the select list does not confer the petitioners with any right to demand that all vacancies should be reported and filled up.

¶74

Adv.P.C.Sasidharan, learned Standing Counsel for the PSC made the following

¶75

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶76

-13-

¶77

submissions;

¶78

The last date of receipt of applications fixed in Ext.P1 notification was 28.01.2015. A total of 19500 applications were received. The OMR test was held on 07.04.2016. Meanwhile, Ext.P3 judgment was rendered, requiring the KSEBL to report 799 vacancies and directing the PSC to publish the select list and rank list and also to advice candidates. Aggrieved by the judgment, KSEBL preferred writ appeal and the Division Bench stayed the direction of the learned Single Judge. The Division Bench further directed to keep the selection procedure in abeyance until further orders. In the meanwhile, the KSEBL decided to abolish 799 posts of Meter Readers and subsequently, the Division Bench, by Ext.P5, set aside Ext.P3 judgment of the Single Bench. At that time, only one NJD vacancy for the post was reported. As per decision No.23 dated 08.11.2016, the PSC had decided to prepare a probability list

¶79

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶80

-14-

¶81

containing 1000 candidates in the merit list

¶82

along with a supplementary list. As no vacancies,

¶83

other than the NJD vacancy was reported, the Commission vide decision dated 02.11.2020 published a probability list containing 632

¶84

candidates in the main list and 603 candidates in the supplementary list. The rank list for the post was published on 19.03.2021 with 600 candidates in the main list and advice was made to 220 vacancies on 29.07.2021. As only 220 vacancies were available, the number of candidates included in the main list and short list are sufficient. Reference is made to the

¶85

decision in Manjit Singh and others (supra ) to contend that in selections consisting of a composite test of written examination followed by viva voce test, the number of candidates to be called for interview should not exceed twice or at any rate, thrice the number of vacancies to

¶86

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶87

-15-

¶88

be filled. Reliance is placed on the Full Bench

¶89

decision in Ravidas v. Public Service Commission [2009 (2) KLT 295 (FB) ] to emphasise the power of the Commission to fix the number of candidates to

¶90

be included in the ranked list. Being contextually relevant, paragraph 42 of that judgment is extracted hereunder;

¶91

“42. Further, the petitioners have no

¶92

right to claim that all the vacancies arising over a period of 3 years should be filled up from only one ranked list. As per the rules, the validity of a ranked list (except in the case of recruitment to posts involving training) is for a period of 3 years from the date of publication or till a fresh ranked list is published, whichever is earlier. The Commission is therefore free to notify vacancies and publish a fresh ranked list without waiting for the period of 3 years to run out. Further, recruitment by the Commission to the State Civil Service is a continuous and ongoing process. Every year hundreds of thousands of students pass out of schools and colleges in the State. If the contention of the petitioners that the Commission should publish

¶93

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶94

-16-

¶95

ranked lists large enough to fill up all the vacancies arising during a period of 3 years from its publication is accepted, students who pass out of schools and colleges will have to wait for years after completion of their studies to even apply for employment. The Commission decides on the number of candidates to be included in the ranked list based on the vacancies actually reported to them and where the vacancies do not exist and are not reported, based on vacancies anticipated to arise. The Apex Court has in Ashok Kumar Yadav & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors. (supra) held that where there is a composite test consisting of written examination followed by a viva-voce, the number of candidates to be called for the interview in the order of marks obtained in the written examination, should not exceed twice or at the highest, thrice the number of vacancies to be filled. The shortlist and the ranked list published for appointment to the post of Veterinary Surgeon Grade-II satisfy the above criterion. Though in State of Punjab and others v. Manjit Singh & Ors. (supra) the Apex Court has held that generally speaking the shortlist has to be in the ratio of 3:5 candidates per post, a larger bench of four Judges of the Apex Court has in Ashok Kumar Yadav & Ors. v. State of Haryana (supra) held that the number of

¶96

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶97

-17-

¶98

candidates to be called for interview should not exceed twice or at the highest, thrice the number of vacancies to be filled. No material has been placed before us to show that besides the 81 notified vacancies, other vacancies had been reported to the Commission before the preparation of the shortlist and the ranked list. Therefore, it cannot be said that adequate number of candidates were not included in Ext.P6 shortlist or in the ranked list published on 2.7.2005. In any case, the ranked list contained more than 3 times the number of notified vacancies and from the ranked list, 258 candidates were also advised. Therefore, we find no illegality in the preparation of Ext.P6 shortlist or the ranked list published by the Commission on 2.7.2005 for the post of Veterinary Surgeon Grade II in the Animal Husbandry Department.”

¶99

It is finally contended that the select list cannot be treated as a reservoir for the purpose of appointment and vacancies can be filled up by taking names from the list as and when required.

¶100

Adv.Asok B Shenoy appearing for the additional respondents in W.P.(C) No.3923 of 2021, submitted that the additional respondent is

¶101

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶102

a union representing the Meter Readers/Spot

¶103

Billers employed on contract basis since January 2003, September, 2003 and April 2004

¶104

respectively. It is submitted that an industrial dispute raised by the first respondent seeking regularisation of contract/daily waged Meter Reader/Spot Biller is pending adjudication before the Industrial Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram as ID No.6 of 2018. Any decision rendered by this Court, touching upon the rights of the contract employees, will have an impact on the industrial dispute.

¶105

The short question arising from the

¶106

elaborate arguments advanced is whether this Court is justified in delving into the factual dispute regarding the number of vacancies available and to direct the PSC to publish an expanded short list. In this regard it is pertinent to note that as per the petitioners' contention, the available vacancies are 647 in

¶107

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶108

-19-

¶109

number while the KSEBL takes up the position that, at present, the openings in the sanctioned strength for direct recruitment is only 436. The Board has a further contention that, as there has been drastic reduction in the work load of certain categories of workmen, including Meter Readers, it is inevitable to redefine the duties and responsibilities of underutilised employees and to reduce the vacancies in a phased manner. It is in the above context that the Board reported only 218 vacancies.

¶110

The PSC's contention is that the

¶111

Commission is statutorily vested with the right to decide the number of candidates to be included

¶112

in the short list and rank list. I find the contention to be well founded in the light of the dictum laid down by the Full Bench in Ravidas

¶113

( supra ). Although learned Counsel for the petitioners contended that the reason for

¶114

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶115

-20-

¶116

abolition of the post of Meter Reader and refusal to report the existing and anticipated vacancies is fallacious and ill-motivated, the fact remains that, abolition of 799 posts based on the very same reasoning was accepted by the Division Bench in Ext.P5 judgment. Moreover, it is settled law that there is minimum scope for interference in matters of policy, unless the

¶117

policy is found to be patently arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of the fundamental

¶118

rights of a group of employees. An

¶119

unsubstantiated allegation that the policy is ill-motivated and intended to safeguard the interest of contract employees is not sufficient reason for this Court to exercise the power of judicial review. More so, since an industrial dispute seeking regularisation of service raised by the contract employees is pending

¶120

consideration before the competent forum. The legal position that mere inclusion in a select

¶121

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶122

-21-

¶123

list or even rank list does not confer the candidates with any indefensible right to demand appointment is too well laid down to be deviated from. The employer's discretion to fill up or not to fill up the vacancies has also been repeatedly upheld. One such decision being in S.S.Balu and another v State of Kerala and others [2009(2) SCC

¶124

479] .

¶125

In view of the above settled legal position, I find no reason to interfere with the process of selection to the post of Meter Reader/Spot Biller undertaken by the PSC based on Ext.P1 notification.

¶126

In the result, the writ petitions are

dismissed.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN JUDGE

Scl/

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶132

-22-

¶133

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2542/2021

¶134

PETITION	ER EXHI	BITS
EXHIBIT	P1	TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE SHORT LIST PUBLISHED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 04.01.2021.
EXHIBIT	P2	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 04.01.2018 INWPC NO.30039/2016.
EXHIBIT	P3	TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 15.05.2019 IN WA NO.188/2018.
EXHIBIT	P4	TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION OBTAINED UNDER RTI ACT DATED 13.01.2021.
EXHIBIT	P5	TRUE COPY OF GO(MS) NO.232/PD DATED 12.08.1971.
EXHIBIT	P6	TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.55419/SD-1/86/GAD DATED 19.04.1986 ISSUED BY ADDL.CHIEF SECRETARY, GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (SERVICES D) DEPARTMENT.
EXHIBIT	P7	TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.10460/ADV.C1/95/P & ARD DATED 18.07.1995 ISSUED BY ADDL.SECRETARY, PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS (ADVICE C) DEPARTMENT.
EXHIBIT	P8	TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.10336/ADV.C3/2014/P & ARD DATED 23.07.2014 ISSUED BY SECRETARY, PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATE REFORMS (ADVICE C) DEPARTMENT.
EXHIBIT	P9	TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR BEARING NO.ADV.C1/200/2018/P & ARD DATED
		18.01.2019 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT.
EXHIBIT	P10	TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR BEARING NO.ADV.C3/101/2019/P & ARD DATED 20.09.2019 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT.
EXHIBIT	P11	TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 19.10.2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit	P12	TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE RANKED LIST FOR SELECTION TO THE POST OF METER READERS/SPOT BILLER ON 19.03.2021

¶135

W.P.(C) Nos.2542 & 3923 of 2021

¶136

-23-

¶137

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3923/2021

¶138

PETITION	ER EXHI	BITS
EXHIBIT	P1	A TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION FOR CATEGORY 557/2014 DATED 26-12-2014
EXHIBIT	P2	TRUE COPIES OF THE HALL TICKETS ISSUED TO PETITIONERS
EXHIBIT	P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDMENT DATED 4/1/2018 IN W.P.C 30039/2016
EXHIBIT	P4	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO 494/2018/ESTT.26718/2016 DATED 22-03- 2018
EXHIBIT	P5	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 15-06- 2019 IN W.A 173/2018 AND CONNECTED CASES
EXHIBIT	P6	A TRUE COPY OF RESPONSE TO THE UNSTARRED QUESTION NUMBER 641 IN THE 22ND SESSION OF THE 14TH KERALA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY ON 13-01-2021
EXHIBIT	P7	A TRUE COPY OF THE RESPONSE TO UNSTARRED QUESTION NUMBER 2454 IN THE 15TH SESSION OF THE 14TH KERALA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY DATED 14-06-2019
EXHIBIT	P8	A TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. EB2/SE/ (ELE.)/MR/PROMOTION/2020 DATED 20-08- 2020
EXHIBIT	P9	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. B.O(FTD) NO. 641/2020(EB4(C0 MR/VACANCY REPORT/2020-21 DATED 19-10-2020
EXHIBIT	P10	TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION NO. P.R (1)5931/2014 DATED 29-01-2018
EXHIBIT	P11	TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION NO. 557/2014 DATED 4/1/2021

Sanal Kumar K P v. Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanal Kumar K P v. Kerala State Electricity Board Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raji Mathew & Co. Vs Union of India

Libin K Issac Vs the State of Kerala

Basil Thomas Vs Canara Bank, Pala Branch

Shibeesh .v Vs Kerala State Electricity Board

Sukumaran.K.N. Vs Kerala Gramin Bank

P.Mohammedkutty Vs Union of India