KOYIT JOSEPH Vs. SUBASH GEORGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Two appeals have been filed by third parties, after obtaining leave, challenging the judgment of a learned single Judge, in O.P.No. 11407 of 1996. The Special Rules governing the service authorizes the Government to earmark 10% of the vacancies to sportsmen in certain categories, and the issue centers round the exercise of powers by the government in these region. The facts leading to th4se proceedings could be stated herein below.

(2.) The first respondent, in both the appeals, was the petitioner in O.P.No. 11407 of 1996. At the time when the Original Petition was filed in July 1996, the petitioner was working as Armed Police Inspector attached to the Special Armed Police, Trivandrum. The State of Kerala and the Director General of Police were respondents in the Original Petition. The Petition had urged that denial of appointment to him as Armed Police Inspector with retrospective effect from the date of his initial appointment is discriminatory, since such relief has been granted to others. He prayed for a direction to command the respondents to appoint him with retrospective from the date of initial appointment and with all consequential benefits.

(3.) Petitioner is seen to have been appointed as a Trainees Sub Inspector of Police in the Armed Police Battalion as per the order of the Director General of Police dated 28-01-1986. After completion of the training period, he was appointed as Armed Police Sub Inspector, which was regularized with effect from the date of his joining duty. On 07-09-1989, by Ext.P3 order, the petitioner and nine others had been conferred with a special benefit, the Government invoking the powers under Rule 39 of the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules [hereinafter referred to as the KSSR]. They were appointed as Armed Police Inspectors after creating supernumerary posts. It had been observed in Ext. P3 that the Director General of Police had recommended that the officers, who have brought credit to the Kerala Police, by their outstanding performance required to be suitably rewarded.