Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE THURSDAY, THE6H DAY OF FEBRUARY201417TH MAGHA, 1935 WA.No. 2449 of 2009 ( ) --------------------------------------------- (AGAINST THE JUDGMENT
IN WP(C).NO. 29571/2007 DATED2811-2008) -------------------------------- APPELLANT/5TH RESPONDENT: -------------------------------------------------------- P. SREEKUMAR, ARTIST-IN-CHARGE, O/O.THE DIRECTOR OF ARCHEOLOGY, SREEPADAM PALACE, VADAKKE NADA, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-23. BY ADVS.SRI.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI SMT.C.G.PREETHA SRI.T.K.SANDEEP SRI.ARJUN SREEDHAR SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE(MULLAKKARIYIL) SRI.K.RATHISH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S)/WRIT PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS1TO4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. JEEVAMOL K.S., AGED34YEARS, W/O.BAIJU KUMAR, PADATH HOUSE, KAKKODY, CALICUT DISTRICT.
2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, CULTURAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM-695 001.
3. DIRECTOR OF ARCHEOLOGY, O/O. THE DIRECTOR OF ARCHEOLOGY, SREEPADAM PALACE, VADAKKE NADA, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM4 KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
5. SECRETARY, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADV. DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM R2 & R3 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.NOBLE MATHEW R4 & R5 BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, KPSC THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON0602-2014, ALONG WITH WA.NO. 2451 OF2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JJ.
.................................................................... W.A.Nos.2449 & 2451 of 2009 .................................................................... Dated this the 6th day of February, 2014.
JUDGMENT
Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J.
1.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the Public Service Commission and the learned Senior Government Pleader. 2.These writ appeals are by one P.Sreekumar. A vacancy of Artist occurred in the Kerala Archaeological Subordinate Service. The relevant date being the date of occurrence of vacancy, the competent authority noted that there is no qualified inservice candidate for promotion to that post, and therefore, notified that post to the Public Service Commission for direct recruitment. Thereafter, the appellant entered the Kerala Archaeological Subordinate Service as a Draftsman. The recruitment process at the hands of the PSC took time. In the meanwhile, the appellant who entered service as a Draftsman was provisionally promoted as Artist. Thereupon, the Director of Archeology wrote to the PSC WA2449& 2451/09 -2- and the Government withdrawing the proposal for direct recruitment on the premise that the appellant was an inservice candidate available for promotion as Artist. Two writ petitions came to this Court. One by Sreekumar who wanted to challenge the selection process by the PSC, and the other by the candidate selected by the PSC for direct recruitment, seeking a direction that she be appointed on the basis of the advice of the PSC. 3.The learned single Judge noted that what is relevant is the date of occurrence of vacancy. The undisputed fact is that on that date, there was no inservice candidate available for appointment to the post of Artist by promotion from the category of Draftsman. In fact, as already noted, P.Sreekumar, the appellant, entered service as Draftsman only after the date of occurrence of vacancy of Artist. That being so, any promotion given to him provisionally could have been only for the purpose of management of the affairs of the service in public interest until another incumbent joins. This being the legal position, as derived from the relevant statutes and also from the precedents referred to by the learned WA2449& 2451/09 -3- single Judge, we do not find any infirmity in the judgment impugned. We, however, leave open the suggestion of the Director of Archeology to the Government that a supernumerary post in the cadre of Artist may be created to solve the situation. On our query, we are told that the judgment has been given effect to and the appellant has been reverted. For the aforesaid reasons, these writ appeals are dismissed without prejudice to the Government exercising the power, if any, to create a supernumerary post of Artist, if found necessary, in public interest, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case. (THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE) (A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE) jg