K D SOBHANA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a lady, who, going by her affidavit, was aged 45 years at the institution of this writ petition in 2007 and whose unrequited averment is that she is totally blind, was ranked third in Ext. P1, the main list that came into force with effect from 08/10/2003; published by the Kerala Public Service Commission for the post of telephone operator in the service of the second respondent, a District Cooperative Bank. Though the candidates ranked 1 & 2 did not avail the opportunity, the petitioner was not advised by the PSC because the Bank wrote Ext. P3 to it stating, inter alia, that the vacancy of telephone operator no more exists. This was on the premise that one Sri. S. Xavier has been regularized in the service as telephone operator pursuant to Ext. P2 government order dated 16/06/2003, that is, even before the publication of Ext. P1 ranked list, but long after that vacancy was reported to the PSC on 10/08/1999. After giving effect to Ext. P2 government order dated 16/06/2003, the Bank promoted Xavier as junior accountant. Thus, the post of telephone operator held by Xavier became vacant. In spite of the currency of Ext. P1 list, instead of appointing the petitioner at least then, the Bank, as per Ext. R3(a) order dated 17/05/2006, promoted the third respondent as telephone operator. Until then, he was working as peon. Since her Ext. P4 complaint to the Joint Registrar remained unattended to, the petitioner filed this writ petition on 23/05/2007, during the currency of Ext. P1 ranked list; seeking, inter alia, to quash the promotion of the third respondent as telephone operator; to direct the PSC to advise for the appointment of the petitioner and to direct the Bank to appoint her as telephone operator, if necessary, by reverting the third respondent to the post of peon.

(2.) The petitioner's pleadings touching, her selection, the ranked list and allied matters find corroboration in the counter affidavit filed by the fourth respondent - PSC.

(3.) While he does not controvert the material pleadings of the petitioner as regards her selection, entitlement, currency of the ranked list till 07/10/2007 and the non joining of the candidates ranked 1 & 2 in the list, the third respondent states in his counter affidavit that he was initially appointed, provisionally, as peon on 13/01/1994 and was regularized in terms of the Bank's decision dated 22/04/1995, however that the Registrar refused to approve such appointment; leading to prolonged litigation, resulting in Ext. P2 approval order by the Government. He seeks to justify his promotion as per Ext. R3(a).