STATE OF KERALA Vs. SREEKANTAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question that arises for consideration in these appeals is as to whether the special recruits selected under Rule 17a of the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the K. S. S. R. ') should be included in the quota reserved for direct recruits when under the Special Rules the method of appointment is both by direct recruitment and transfer/promotion.

(2.) THE facts necessary for the disposal of these appeals, in the light of the contentions raised by the Additional Advocate General on behalf of the State, are as follows: These Writ Appeals arise out of a common judgment in the writ petitions filed by the petitioners who had applied for appointment as Sales Tax Officers pursuant to a notification by the Public Service Commission published in the Kerala Gazette dated July 20, 1982. The petitioners were included in the ranked list dated October 31, 1984. Their complaint was that in spite of the prescription of the ratio 1:3 in the Kerala Agricultural Income Tax and Sales Tax Service Special Rules issued in G. O. MS. 706/64 dated October 26, 1964, the number of vacancies earmarked for direct recruits was not reported to the Public Service Commission, consequent to which the Departmental promotees were wrongfully occupying such positions on provisional promotions. According to the petitioners if all the existing vacancies available for direct recruitment were reported to the Public Service Commission, the petitioners who were included in the ranked list would have been appointed. It is seen that the ratio of 1:3 between direct recruits and promotees was amended as 1:4 by G. O. (P) 131/85/pd dated November 4, 1985 (Ext. P3) with retrospective effect from April 1, 1981. The petitioners challenged the vires of the amendment to the Special Rules with retrospective effect from April 1, 1981 as an indirect attempt to continue departmental promotees who were appointed as Sales-Tax Officers in excess of the ratio. Consequently the petitioners sought the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to report 25% of the vacancies in the category of Sales Tax Officers which arose subsequent to April 1, 1981 to the Public Service Commission and to appoint direct recruites in the vacancies ear-marked for them in accordance with the Special Rules. Petitioners also sought to quash Ext. P3 amendment of the Special Rules altering the quota available to direct recruits from 25% to 20%.

(3.) IT has come out that the Special Rules for the Kerala Agricultural Income tax and Sales Tax Service provided that one out of every four vacancies shall be filled up by direct recruitment; but direct recruitment was made for the first time only in 1973 and only two persons were appointed and all other vacancies including those earmarked for direct recruits were occupied by provisional promotees. The Special Rules were amended as per G. O. (P) 141/84/pd dated September 4, 1984 providing that direct recruitment to the category of Sales Tax Officers shall be deemed to have come into force only on January 1, 1974. As a result of this G. O. only departmental promotees could be promoted to the vacancies which arose for the period from 1964 to 1974. Thereafter, according to the petitioners, on the basis of the pressure exerted by departmental candidates, Ext. P3 G. O. dated November 4, 1985 was issued, thereby reducing the quota available for direct recruitment to 20%. Petitioners challenged the amendment and there was also dispute between the parties as to the number of vacancies available for being directly appointed.