A S AJAS Vs. REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners challenge Exts.Pl(a) and Pl(b). They also challenge Ext.P7 seniority list. Petitioners were appointed as Assistant Grade II on 4.3.1999. Period of probation is prescribed as one year of duty within a continuous period of two years from the date on which they join duty. In order to being qualified as Assistant Grade I, the employee should pass Account Test Lower. Learned Counsel for the petitioners does not dispute that for declaration of probation pass in MOP is essential. Petitioners came to be promoted along with others vide Ext.P5 dated 2.9.2000. It is seen that petitioners are promoted with effect from 21.7.2000. Complaint of the petitioners would appear to be that the regular vacancies occurred from 29.10.1999 to 6.7.2000. Going by the rule prescribing period of probation, it is two years. Therefore it is contended that they have time till 2001 with reference to proviso to Rule 28(a) of the K.S.& S.S.R. It is their case that party respondents excluding respondents 15 to 17 are juniors to the petitioners in the feeder category. Consequently when the vacancies occurred between October, 1999 and July 2000 it is the petitioners who ought to have been promoted. Learned Counsel for the petitioners relied on two decisions of this court, one reported in Devadasan v. K.S.E.B. 2001 (1) KLT 278 and the unreported judgment in W.A. 880 of 1998. In Devadasan's case this Court held as follows:

(2.) In W.A. 880 of 1998 the Court held as follows:

(3.) There is no merit in the Writ Petition and it is dismissed.