M. RAMACHANDRAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is challenging Annexure I order passed by the Kerala Administrative Tribunal in T.A.1424/12 by which Ext. P12 order transferring the petitioner from the Department of Irrigation as junior most in the Public Works Department was set aside and it was directed that petitioner would be treated as having continued in the Irrigation Department notwithstanding his transfer granted as per Ext. P12. The facts of the case are as follows.

(2.) The petitioner was a candidate who submitted application for selection and appointment as Assistant Engineer pursuant to the notification issued by the Public Service Commission as per Annexure A1 notification issued on 19.6.1986 in the erstwhile PWD. While so the PWD was bifurcated as per Annexure A2 order dated 29.3.1990. As per Clause (xxi) of this order the PSC has to be requested to prepare a common rank list from which advice was to be made to Public Works (Roads and Buildings) Department or Irrigation Department as per request of the department for the purpose of direct recruitment. Clause (xxii) provided that a committee consisting of two Chief Engineers each from Public Works Department and Irrigation Department be formed in order to examine the issues arising under bifurcation and to advise the Government for suitable action. The petitioner was thereafter advised by the PSC as per Ext. P1 advice memo issued on 11.5.1993 for appointment as Assistant Engineer in PWD. Thereafter by Ext. P2 he was appointed in the Irrigation Department on 28.5.1993. Aggrieved by the appointment in the Irrigation Department, as against his application for appointment in the PWD petitioner submitted several representations before the respondents. When the representation was rejected by Ext P5 letter dated 16.5.1998, saying that he should not have accepted the posting in Irrigation Department and ought to have waited for a posting in PWD. Challenging Ext P5, petitioner filed O.P.11910/98, for a direction to respondents appoint him in PWD. This Court, by Ext. P6 order dated 16.8.1999, issued an interim direction to keep one post of Assistant Engineer in the PWD vacant. During the pendency of the O.P, Government issued an order Ext. P8 on 6.8.2003 by which two Assistant Engineers M/s. P.S. Krishnadas and E.K. Hydru of the Irrigation Department were absorbed as Assistant Engineers in PWD. M/s. P.S. Krishnadas and E.K. Hydru were juniors to the petitioner and according to petitioner, they were absorbed in the PWD in preference to him. In these circumstances this court disposed of the O.P directing the petitioner to approach the government with a detailed representation and government was directed to pass orders taking into consideration of the order passed by the government in Ext. P8. Thereafter, Government issued Ext. P10 order rejecting the request of the petitioner, saying that applications were invited by PSC prior to the bifurcation of PWD and in the newly formed PWD there were no vacancies for fresh recruitment; the advice of the petitioner by the PSC was not only to PWD but also to Irrigation Department and therefore there was nothing wrong in his appointment in the Irrigation Department. Regarding the two Assistant Engineers referred to by the petitioner, it was stated that they were selected as Assistant Engineers in the departmental quota and they had opted PWD in the process of bifurcation while they were working as Overseers/Draftsmen in the erstwhile PWD. Hence his request was rejected, pointing out that petitioner was not entitled to be posted in PWD. The petitioner continued to submit representations requesting for posting in PWD. Finally by Ext. P12 order issued on 19.8.2005 government passed an order appointing the petitioner as Assistant Engineer in PWD, on interdepartmental transfer basis on his request subject to the terms and conditions stipulated in G.O(MS) No. : 4/61/OD dated 2.1.61 as a special case. The petitioner was directed to report within fifteen days on relieving from the Irrigation Department.

(3.) Petitioner joined duty in PWD. As the petitioner had not made any request for interdepartmental transfer agreeing to be junior most in PWD, he submitted representations Exts. P13 and P13 before the Minister on 6.9.05 and 12.9.05, requesting to delete the conditions in the order of his transfer. Govt. rejected it by Ext. P16 letter dated 20.3.07, saying that interdepartmental transfer was given to him following the spirit of the orders of this Court in the judgment in O.P.11910/98. It was stated the principles for transfer to the PWD can only be in terms of the principles laid down in Government Order dated 2.1.1961. It was further stated therein that he cannot seek cancellation of the conditions in the order, after joining duty in the PWD, based on the order dated 19.8.2005.