VILASINI Vs. UNIVERSITY OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner belongs to a scheduled caste community. She applied for the post of Compositor Grade II pursuance to the advertisement issued by the first respondent inviting applications for the above post. In the select list prepared by the first respondent the petitioner was included as serial number 67. According to the petitioner, there was no other scheduled caste candidate other than the petitioner to be considered for appointment in the quota reserved for the scheduled caste. So, according to the petitioner, there is no reason for the respondents to refuse appointment to the petitioner.

(2.) A statement has been filed by the respondents. In the statement it has been mentioned that in the previous selection three scheduled candidates were appointed. In fact only two scheduled caste candidates were eligible to be appointed. One Scheduled caste candidate was appointed against the slot earmarked for Other Backward Communities. Thus, the scheduled caste community derived an extra benefit which has to be re-couped in the next selection. This is quite consistent with R.15 of the K.S. & S.S.R.

(3.) According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, under R.15(b) if a suitable candidate is not available for selection from the group of communities classified as Scheduled Castes the said group shall be passed over and the post shall be filled up by suitable candidate from the group of communities classified as Scheduled Tribes and vice-versa. Therefore, according to the petitioner, the Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Tribe candidates need not surrender the extra post which they received in a previous selection. It is only when other communities received extra benefit the extra benefit must be surrendered in the next selection. But I do not think the above argument is consistent with provisions contained in R.15 of the K.S. & S.S.R.R. I5(a) states that if a suitable candidate is not available for selection from any particular community or group of communities, the said community or group shall be passed over and the post shall be filled up by a suitable candidate from the communities immediately next to the passed over community. If no suitable candidate is available for selection in any of the above communities or group of communities, then the selection shall be made from open competition candidates. R.15(b) deals with a situation when no suitable candidate is available from Scheduled Castes or from the Scheduled Tribes. Then the suitable candidate from either of the communities can be considered. R.15(c) says that the benefit of the turn forfeited to a particular community or to a group of community by reason of it being passed over under sub-rr. (a) and (b) shall be restored to it, at the earliest possible opportunity, if a suitable candidate from that particular community or group is available for selection by making adjustment against the claims of the particular community or group that derived the extra benefit by reason of such passing over. Thus, it is obvious that R.15(c) will apply both to R.15(a) and 15(b). In fact in this case, the Scheduled Caste community got an extra benefit in the previous situation not by virtue of R.15(b) but by virtue of R.15(a). R.15(a) deals with generally the passing over of the community in which there is no suitable candidate. In such a situation the next community or group of community below the passed over community will get the extra benefit. This is irrespective of the fact whether they are SC/ST candidates or candidates belonging to any other group of communities. Therefore, the Scheduled Caste candidate cannot sustain a plea that he is not liable to surrender the extra benefit in favour of any other candidate belonging to other group of community. When R.15(c) specifically mentions about the adjustment of the vacancy in favour of the group of community which derived extra benefit, a Scheduled Caste community cannot contend otherwise. Therefore, I do not find any substance in the contention of the petitioner. The Original Petition is dismissed.