DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES Vs. SREEDHARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent in O.P. 1138/1986 is the appellant. Decision rendered by the learned Single Judge, which is reported in Sreedharan v. Director of Industries 1990 (1) KLT 76 , is under challenge.

(2.) The short facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal are as follows: Public Service Commission prepared a ranked list of successful candidates for appointment as Lower Division Clerks in various departments of Cannanore Revenue District. Writ Petitioner was ranked in that list. On the basis of the rank in the list, petitioner was advised for appointment in the Revenue Department. District Collector Cannanore required the petitioner to submit his proforma for verification of character and antecedents. While others were appointed before verification, petitioner was not given appointment Since there was no vacancy in Cannanore Revenue Establishment, Public Service Commission advised the petitioner for appointment in one of the Headquarters vacancies in the Port Department Pursuant to the order of appointment issued by the Director of Ports, Thiruvananthapuram, petitioner joined duty on 1.8.1977. While working as Lower Division Clerk in the Directorate of Ports, he successfully completed the period of probation. Probation was declared by order dated 10.8.1980. Petitioner requested that he may be posted in Cannanore District, which unit he had indicated while applying for appointment Government by order dated 17.7.1981 agreed to the interdepartmental transfer of the petitioner to the district of his choice and Director of Industries appointed the petitioner as Lower Division Clerk in the Coir Project Office by his order dated 22.7.1981. He joined duty in that post on 3.8.1981. He claimed seniority in the cadre of Lower Division Clerk in the Industries Department on the basis of the first effective advice of the Commission dated 30.3.1977. Learned single Judge declared that the petitioner is entitled to rank as Lower Division Clerk in the Industries Department with effect from 30.3.1977 and was an approved probationer with effect from 7.8.1980.

(3.) Government by Exhibit P1- G.O.(MS)442/80/GAD dated 26.9.1980-ordered that transfers within the district comprised in the erstwhile Malabar and Travancore-Cochin areas will be allowed within 5 years, subject to other conditions. However, it was stated that cases of inter district transfers from a district in a unit to a district in another unit, i .e. Malabar area and Travancore-Cochin area, in relaxation of the 5 year rule shall be placed before the Council of Ministers for approval, Government also accepted the advice of the Public Service Commission that conditions of 5 years service laid down in G.O. (MS) 154/71/PD dated 27.5.1971 for inter district transfers will not be applicable to the candidates who were advised for appointment in the Headquarters vacancies, so that a candidate could get transfer to the District of his choice without insisting on the period of five years. This provision in the said G.O. was made applicable to interdepartmental transfers of district wise recruits by Exhibit P2, G.O. MS. No. 180/81/GAD dated 3.6.1961. The provisions contained in these Government Orders have been incorporated as second proviso to R.27 of Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules. That amendment is to the following effect: