SANKARAN NAIR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was a Ranger in the Madras Forest Service when he was allotted to Kerala on the formation of the State on November 1, 1956. He was appointed an Assistant Conservator of Forests by the order, Ext. P1, date July 31, 1959, of the Chief Conservator of Forests, ratified by the Government by the order, Ext. P.2, dated August 12. He joined duty on August 10, 1959, and had since then been holding that post. Respondents 2 to 9 were appointed Assistant Conservators by direct recruitment in the years 1959-1962. THE petitioner challenges their appointments as violative of the Rules on the matter and therefore illegal and void; and asserts that, even if their appointments could be regularised, the petitioner is senior to them. However, on June 24, 1963, he was served with the order, Ext. P.4, reverting him to give place to the 10th respondent who was appointed as Assistant Conservator on September 9, 1960. THE petitioner's representation to Government evidenced by Ext. P7 dated June 30, 1963, has not been disposed of. Meanwhile, on the ground that the petitioner passed the Account Test for Executive Officers on February 28, 1961 only, the Government issued the order, Ext. P9, directing the petitioner's probation to be reckoned only from that day. THE petitioner submitted a representation, Ext. P10, on February 1, 1963, requesting the Government to grant him permanent exemption from the obligation to pass the Account Test in view of his 20 years' service and to declare commencement of his probation from April 11, 1960, when he completed 45 years of age. Though that was recommended favourably by the Chief Conservator, nothing came out of it; and the Chief Conservator wrote to the Government on July 2, 1963, to declare completion of the petitioner's probation on April 29, 1963. THE learned Advocate-General has produced before us the Government's order dated March 7, 1964, rejecting the petitioner's representation, Ext. P10. THE petitioner contends that he was not obliged to pass the Account Test and that, counting his probation from August 10, 1959, he is senior to the 10th respondent and prays for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the order for his reversion and "a writ of quo warranto calling upon respondents 2 to 9 to show under what authority they are functioning" as Assistant Conservators.

(2.) THE State and the other respondents have filed affidavits-in-opposition. Several documents in support of the respective averments have been filed by the parties, and lengthy arguments which lasted three days have been addressed to us.

(3.) IT was next contended that the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules, 1958, having been issued on December 17, 1958, "in supersession of the rules on the subject", R.5 of Part II - General Rules - thereof governs appointments made in 1959 and after, and that the direct recruitments of respondents 2 to 9 in violation of that rule have to be set at naught as illegal. That Rule reads: