MOHANKUMAR A.S. Vs. VINOD J.K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 25918/2017. The writ petition was filed by the respondents 1 to 3 in WA No.918/2018 inter alia challenging Exts.P8 and P12 and for a declaration that the petitioners are entitled to appointment by option as Section Officers in the 2nd respondent University with all consequential benefits with retrospective effect from the dates on which respondents 5 to 7 were appointed as Section Officers.

(2.) The short facts of the case are as under and the parties are described as shown in the writ petition unless otherwise stated.

(3.) Petitioners 1 and 2 were working as Section Officers (Higher Grade) in the Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam and the 3rd petitioner as Section Officer (HG) in the University of Kerala. After formation of A.P.J. Abdul Kalam Technological University, the 2nd respondent herein, they have been permitted by the Government to invite option from employees of Universities for appointment to various posts including Section Officer. Ext.P3 circular was issued by the 2 nd respondent inviting options from regular employees of various Universities. Petitioners have exercised their option along with a few others and Ext.P4 list of optees in the order of seniority was sent by MG University. There was only one person to opt in the Kerala University, who is the 3rd petitioner. The 2nd respondent by their order Ext.P8 dated 24/7/2017 appointed 8 persons from various Universities as Section Officers. Respondents 5 to 7 were among the persons who were appointed from M.G.University and no person was appointed from University of Kerala. Petitioners submitted that they have not been selected for being appointed in the said University stating that minimum 5 years service must be left in the post of Section Officer. The above restriction had been imposed only with respect to Section Officers and in other categories no such age limit had been pressed into service. According to the petitioners, those who have been appointed were their juniors and therefore they sought for the aforesaid reliefs. They have also produced the extract of the minutes of the Executive Committee of the University held on 30/6/2017 in which a decision was taken that, for the posts of Section Officer and Assistant, only those applicants who had not completed 51 years of age on the date of publication of option notification shall alone be considered for appointment in the University.