PRADEEP V B Vs. JOSEPH ZACHARIAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question that has come up for consideration in this case is whether the Kerala Public Service Commission (hereinafter called 'the Commission') has properly applied the reservation principles enumerated in Rule 15 (c) of the Kerala State and Subordinate Service Rules (for short 'the Rules').

(2.) Before we go into the legal question, let us examine the facts of the case. The Commission published a rank list for appointment to the post of Lecturer in Electronics and Communication Engineering in the Technical Educational Department. The rank list was published on 23.7.1999. Writ petitioner- first respondent was assigned rank No.74. He belongs to Other Christian (O.X). Appellant- third respondent in the writ petition was assigned rank No.98. He belongs to Dheevara community. Members of both the communities are eligible to reservation in the matter of appointment in government service as per the provisions of Rules 14 to 17 of Part II of the Rules. Communal rotation as per Rules 14 to 17 of Part II of the Rules is an integrated cycle consisting of 50 open turns and 50 communal turns. In the cycle of 100 turns there is only one turn for Other Christian (O.X.), that is 48. Commission maintains a compensation register. The register shows that turn 48 relating to other Christian was passed over on 2.4.1991, as no candidate from the said community was available when its turn arose. In that turn the next available community in the order of rotation was Dheevara at turn 50. A member of Dheevara community was accordingly nominated. Subsequently when the turn of Dheevara community was reached, there was no other candidate available either from other Christian community or from Dheevara community. Consequently turn was passed of to the next vacancy in the order of rotation. Accordingly the turn was filled up with a member of Ezhava community. This was the position with regard to previous selection.

(3.) The present rank list was published on 23.7.1999. Turn started at 57 which was ear-marked for open competition. Next turn is 58 which according to rotations goes to Ezhava community. The Commission accordingly filled up turn 58 by a member of the Dheevara community, the third respondent on the plea that earlier rotation of Dheevara community was passed off and a member of Ezhava community was nominated. First respondent herein belongs to Other Christian. He challenged the action of the Commission stating that the turn should have gone to Other Christian. Learned single judge held in favour of the writ petitioner-first respondent. Aggrieved by the same, this appeal has been preferred by additional third respondent.