RENJITH RAJU Vs. S. SYAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These original petitions have been filed by challenging order dated 07-04-2017 in OA No.8/2016 on the file of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal at Thiruvananthapuram. OP (KAT) No.158/2017 has been filed by the 4th respondent in OA No.8/2016 while OP (KAT) No.289/2018 has been filed by the State and its officers who were respondents 1 to 3 in that original application. The parties are referred to as they appear in OP (KAT) No.158/2017 and documents referred to are referred to as they are marked in that original petition unless otherwise specified.

(2.) The dispute between the 1st respondent and the petitioner in OP (KAT) No.158/2017 relate to qualification for being considered for promotion to the post of Foreman (Tool Room) in the Industries Department of the Government of Kerala. The post of Foreman (Tool Room) is to be filled up in accordance with the Special Rules for the Kerala Industries Service, 2011 which was brought into force with effect from 26-02-2011. On 01-04-2011 a vacancy of Foreman (Tool Room) arose on account of retirement. As per the provisions in the Special Rules, the post was to be filled up by transfer from Kerala Industries Subordinate Service and in the absence of qualified hands by direct recruitment. The petitioner in OP (KAT) No.158/2017 and the 1 st respondent applied for the post of Foreman (Tool Room). A Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) met and a select list was published including the name of the 1st respondent. Aggrieved by the inclusion of the 1st respondent, the petitioner filed a representation. He also moved the Kerala Administrative Tribunal through OA No.1121/2014 which was disposed of directing consideration of that representation. The petitioner contended that the 1 st respondent was not eligible to be considered for appointment, by transfer, as Foreman (Tool Room) on account of the fact that he has not completed probation in the post of Junior Co-operative Inspector which, it is not disputed is a feeder category for the post of Foreman (Tool Room), as the said post is a post borne on the Kerala Industries Subordinate Service. The 1 st petitioner being aggrieved by the non-compliance of the order in OA No.1121/2014 filed a contempt of court case before the Tribunal as CP No.193/2015. That contempt petition was closed on the Government intimating the Tribunal that a decision had already been taken to cancel the earlier select list and also to include the petitioner in the new select list for the post of Foreman (Tool Room). The 1 st respondent, therefore, approached the Tribunal through OA No.8/2016 being aggrieved by the decision to cancel the select list.

(3.) One of the contentions taken in OA No.8/2016 was that the petitioner is not qualified to be considered for appointment by transfer as Foreman (Tool Room) on account of the fact that he is working as a Machine Operator Gr-II which is not a post which is included or recognised as a post borne on the Kerala Industries Subordinate Service, 2011. The petitioner, on the other hand, contended that the 1 st respondent was not eligible to be considered for the post of Foreman (Tool Room) on account of the fact that he had entered service in the Industries Department as Lower Division Clerk on 01-02-2006, was promoted as Upper Division Clerk on 18-11-2018 and was later appointed as Junior Co-operative Inspector (by transfer) on 09-03-2011 in which post his probation was declared only with effect from 10-03- 2012. It is therefore submitted that on the date of occurrence of the vacancy of Foreman (Tool Room) which is 01-04-2011 the 1 st respondent was not eligible to be considered.