SANDEEP S. Vs. DIVYA S. S. ROSE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As the very same verdict of the Tribunal is challenged in the first two O.Ps and as the verdict of the Tribunal in a connected matter is challenged in the third O.P, all these cases are disposed of on the basis of this common judgment. The impugned final order dtd. 10/11/2021 is the subject matter of challenge in these two O.Ps filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India. The two petitioners in O.P(KAT)No.331/2021 are contesting respondents 4 & 6 in the above O.A. Whereas, the three petitioners in O.P(KAT) No.93/2022 are the State of Kerala, Forest Department and the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) concerned, who have been arrayed as official respondents 1 to 3 in the above O.A. Whereas, respondents 1 to 4 in O.P(KAT) No.331/2021 are the original applicants in the O.A, State of Kerala, Principal Chief Conservator of Forests & the DPC. The documents and pleadings as produced in O.P(KAT) No.331/2021 will be referred to in this judgment for the sake of convenience, as the said O.P was the one which was filed in an earlier point of time. Later, the Director of Vigilance & Anti-Corruption Bureau and the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance & Anti-Corruption Bureau have been impleaded as additional respondents 5 & 6 in O.P(KAT) No.331/2021 and the last person who has been included in Annexure A-2 select list, 2021 has been impleaded as additional respondent No.7 in that O.P. The four respondents in O.P(KAT)No.93/2022 are the original applicant and the contesting respondents 4 to 6 in the above O.A [who incidentally are the three petitioners in O.P(KAT) No.331/2021].

(2.) Heard Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the petitioners in O.P(KAT) No.93/2022 as well as official respondents 2 to 6 in O.P(KAT) No.331/2021, Sri.K.Sandesh Raja, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in O.P(KAT) No.331/2021 as well as for contesting respondents 2 to 4 in O.P(KAT) No.93/2022, Sri.P.J.Elvin Peter, learned Advocate appearing for R1 in both the O.Ps (original applicant in the O.A) and Sri.Nirmal V.Nair, learned counsel appearing for additional contesting respondent No.7 in O.P(KAT) No.331/2021.

(3.) The applicant in the O.A will be referred for convenience as 'the original applicant/applicant'. The applicant was essentially aggrieved by the decision of the DPC referred to in Annexure R1(a), which resulted in the impugned Annexure A-8 select list, 2021 for promotion to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forest, whereby she has been excluded from the said select list on account of the pendency of vigilance proceedings at Annexure A-2. The Tribunal, after hearing the parties in the above O.A, had passed the impugned Ext.P-3 interim order dtd. 21/10/2021 in the above O.A, whereby the submission on behalf of the official respondents that statement will be filed on their behalf on or before 25/10/2021 and that until then, no promotion of the applicant's juniors will be effected in the meantime, was recorded and the case was posted for the statement of the official respondents on 25/10/2021. Later, the Tribunal has rendered the impugned Ext.P-7 final order dtd. 10/11/2021 finally disposing of the instant O.A No.1869/2021, with the clear finding in para No.6 thereof, that the exclusion of the applicant, in pursuance of Annexure-R1(a) minutes of the DPC and Annexure A-8 select list for the year 2021, is in plain violation of the provisions contained in Note (i) to Rule 28(b)(i)(7) of KS&SSR Part-II and the dictum laid down by a learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Sasidharan v. State of Kerala [2008 (4) KLT 149] and that the said error committed by the official respondents need not be allowed to be perpetuated and hence, the official respondents have been directed to include the original applicant in Annexure A-8 select list for 2021, between Sl.No.2 (M.Ajeesh) and Sl.No.3 (B.R.Anuraj - contesting respondent No.5 in the O.A) and that the 1st respondent-State Government was directed to issue necessary orders in that regard. Further, the Tribunal, as per the impugned Ext.P-7 final order, after noting the submissions made, that promotions have already been effected from Annexure A-8 select list 2021 and that, further promotions would not be effected by the official respondents, in view of the interim order dtd. 21/10/2021, etc., has made it clear that the said interim order dtd. 21/10/2021 only restricts the promotion of the juniors of the applicant and that since it is found that the applicant is entitled to be included in Annexure A-8 select list, the applicant's juniors also can be promoted after promoting the applicant. It will be pertinent to refer to the contents of the relevant portion of paras 6 to 8 of Ext.P-7 final verdict of the Tribunal, which read as follows :