V SURESHLAL Vs. CHIEF ENGINEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in the above writ petition are concerned with their promotion to the post of Assistant Sub Engineer (Electrical) in the Kerala State Electricity Board [for brevity "KSEB"]. The petitioners were aggrieved by the fact that, the 10% quota reserved for in-service candidates, for promotion to the post of Assistant Sub Engineers (Civil) were made from the in-service candidates, while the Electrical Division was discriminated insofar as no promotions being made therefrom.

(2.) At the outset it is to be noticed that many persons got impleaded themselves also claimed the said benefit. None are from the Civil Wing and all are from the Electrical Wing, supporting the petitioners. The petitioners also have not chosen to implead any person who would be affected by the reliefs sought for in the writ petition being allowed; either in the Electrical or Civil Wing.

(3.) Be that as it may, the petitioner's contention primarily is based on Exhibits P1 and P12. According to the petitioners, earlier, even in-service candidates could be promoted to the 10% quota only through the Public Service Commission [for brevity "PSC" or "Commission"]. The Government by Exhibit P12 had, on 23.11.1983 itself, taken a decision to reject the action of the PSC, in refusing to concur with the decision of the Government/Board to make appointments from the in-service candidates; from the feeder category without reference to the PSC. As per Exhibit P12, the KSEB is said to have issued Exhibit P1 notification also, clearly specifying that, the promotions would be made from Diploma holders to the post of Sub Engineer. The petitioners also rely on the Kerala Public Service Commission [Consultation by the Kerala State Electricity Board] Regulations, 1967 [for brevity "Regulations of 1967"], produced as Exhibit R4(c) along with the counter affidavit of the 4th respondent.