RAJAMOHAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in these Original Petitions aspire for appointment to the post of Director of Extensions, a post envisaged by S.36 (1) of the Kerala Agricultural University Act, 1971. The post was notified for selection as per Ext. P2 in the first Original Petition. Item No. 5 therein relates to the post of Director of Extensions. Number of post notified is only one. A select list was prepaid containing 3 names and the person holding No. 1 was appointed to the vacancy notified on 12th December 1995. The petitioner submit that the preparation of the select list was bad and each of them contend that they were also to be included in the list based on their qualification, experience, talent and performance in the interview. It was also contended by the petitioner in OP 20020/95 that the principles of communal rotation was not followed in the matter of preparation of select list or in making appointment.

(2.) The person appointed is to retire tomorrow from service on superannuation. Therefore, these questions need not be now agitated because a vacancy is to occur and that has to be filled up.

(3.) Now the debate is focused on how the vacancy shall be filled up, whether the list should be followed for that vacancy in order to appoint the rank No. 2 or 3 as the case may be in the list or the vacancy should be re-notified.