BABY Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are Assistants/Grade I in the Kerala Secretariat Service. Respondents 2 and 3 also belong to that category. They are impleaded in a representative capacity. First petitioner claims seniority over the second respondent and sixth petitioner claims to be the senior of the third respondent. Petitioners and respondents 2 and 3 were originally recruited as Assistant Grade II and they were promoted later as Assistant Grade I. For promotion satisfactory probation and passing of two tests are necessary. Tests are Secretariat Manual Test and Account Test (Lower). Case of the petitioners is that the specified period of probation being three years and as their probation was declared within the said period there is no justification in conferring seniority to respondents 2 and 3 over them on the ground that they were test qualified earlier to the petitioners.

(2.) Commencement of probation of the first petitioner was on 2-12-1978 and his probation was declared on 3-12-1980. Test qualifications were acquired by him on 7-7-1981. Second petitioner's period of probation commenced on 6-12-1978. Probation was declared on 9-1-1981 and he acquired test qualifications on 14-7-1981. Third petitioner's probation commenced on 2-12-1978, his probation was declared on 2-12-1980 and test qualifications were acquired on 14-7-1981. Fourth petitioner commenced her service on 8-3-1979 and her probation was declared on 4-4-1981. Test qualifications were acquired by her on 13-1-1982. Fifth petitioner commenced service on 19-3-1981. Probation was declared on 25-3-1983. Test qualifications were acquired on 15-7-1983. Sixth petitioner's probation commenced on 20-5-1981, probation was declared on 13-6-1983 and test qualifications were acquired on 15-7-1983.

(3.) Petitioners contended that all of them obtained test qualifications within the period of three years and as the Special Rules allow them that much time for declaration of probation and as all of them have acquired test qualifications within the said period promotion given to respondents 2 and 3 overlooking their seniority cannot have any justification. In short, petitioners contend that merely because respondents 2 and 3 and similarly placed officers who were juniors to them had obtained test qualifications earlier they cannot get seniority over the former.