K J ANTONY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was employed as a clerk in the Joint Stock Companies department of the Travancore-Cochin State. The first Respondent is the State represented by the Chief Secretary to the Government. The 2nd Respondent is the officer who was functioning as the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies department during the relevant period. From the year 1950 onwards the Joint Stock Companies department of the State was being run by the State on an agency basis under the Central Government and under that arrangement the members of the staff of the department were for all purposes treated as State Government servants and governed by the Service Regulations of the State. The petitioner was selected by the State Public Service Commission, for appointment as a clerk in the Joint Stock Companies department. This selection was made in December 1952 and the petitioner joined duty in the Registrars Office at Trivandrum on 15-12 -1952. Another candidate, one Shry. Vijayamma, was subsequently recruited by the Public Service Commission for appointment as clerk in the same department and she joined duty on 2-1-1954. Some time later, one Kumara Pillai, a permanent clerk of the department who was on deputation in the Civil Supplies department of the State, was ordered to be reverted to his permanent place in the Joint Stock Companies department. As a consequence of his reversion to the department, the juniormost clerk had to be thrown out for want of a vacancy as per the Standing Orders of the Government. The Government Proceedings regulating this matter have been produced in this case and marked as Ext. IX and it contains the following directions:-

(2.) In opposing the petition, the stand taken by Respondents 1 and 2 is practically the same. The main contentions raised by them is that there has been no removal or dismissal of the petitioner from service so as to attract Art.311 of the Constitution. It is stated that there has only been a natural termination of the petitioners service in the ordinary course and in accordance with the relevant rules and conditions of service. It is further stated that the two offices of the Joint Stock Companies department at Trivandrum and Trichur were functioning as two separate units for purposes of recruitment, promotion and seniority of the members of the staff employed in these two offices and that the petitioner who was recruited to the Trivandrum office could not claim any seniority over Vijayamma who was recruited to the Trichur office. It is also contended that the petitioner is not also entitled to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Art.226 of the Constitution to interfere with the executive orders passed by the Respondents in the exercise of the administrative functions of the Joint Stock Companies department.

(3.) The stand taken by the Respondents that the petitioner was thrown out of service on 5 2 1955 on account of the termination of the vacancy in which he was acting and also on account of the fact that he was the juniormost hand to be relieved in that connection, is seen to be against all facts as disclosed by the records produced in this case. According to the Respondents no question of seniority as between the petitioner and the 3rd Respondent Shry. Vijayamma could arise at that stage, because they were working in two independent offices. In support of that position the 2nd Respondent has stated in Para.4 of his affidavit that even after the integration of the Travancore and Cochin States on 1-7-1949, the departments of Joint Stock Companies in the Travancore and Cochin areas were working separately as two units under two Registrars. But the further averments made by him in the other portions of the affidavit are by themselves sufficient to make out that for the integrated State of Travancore-Cochin there was only one department for the Joint Stock Companies and that this department was under a single Registrar who was none other than the 2nd Respondent himself. Pending integration of the members of the staff belonging to the Travancore Section and the Cochin Section of the department on the date when the two States were integrated, it may be said that the respective ranks to be assigned to these members could not be definitely known. But this has nothing to do with the petitioner and the 3rd respondent who were both recruited as clerks subsequent to the integration of the two States. The petitioner was recruited to the clerical post in the Joint Stock Companies department of the integrated State only towards the close of the year 1952. The memo to that effect issued by the Public Service Commission has been marked as Ext. VI. As per the order made by the 2nd Respondent on the back of this memo, the petitioner is seen to have joined duty on 15-12-1952 in the Registrars Office at Trivandrum. It may noted in this connection that the petitioner was advised as a clerk in the scale of Rs. 30-45 which was the scale of pay in force on that date in the Travancore area. The corresponding scale of pay of the clerks employed in the Cochin area was Rs. 30 75. The communication issued by the Public Service Commission advising the 3rd Respondent Shry. Vijayamma for appointment as a clerk in the Joint Stock Companies department, has been produced and marked as Ext. VIII. This shows that she was also advised for appointment as a clerk in the scale of Rs.30-45 only, thereby indicating that she was recruited for appointment in the Registrars Office at Trivandrum. If she had been recruited for appointment in the Cochin Office, the recruitment would have been for appointment as a clerk on Rs. 30-75. Thus it is clear that the 2nd Respondent has been misrepresenting facts when he stated that Sry. Vijayamma was recruited for appointment to the Cochin Office.