IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 19TH MAGHA 1929 OP.No. 5137 of 1999(J) -------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. T. SURESH, OFFSET OPERATOR GRADE II, GOVERNMENT PRESS, VAZHOOR. 2. M. MUHAMMED, OFFSET OPERATOR GRADE II, GOVERNMENT PRESS, VAZHOOR. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAVINDRAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. SHRI. M.T. SASI, OFFSET OPERATOR GRADE II, (ON ORDERS OF PROMOTION AS OFFSET OPERATOR GRADE II, GOVERNMENT PRESS, MANNANTHALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF PRINTING & STATIONERY (PRINTING), DIRECTORATE OF PRINTING, GOVERNMENT CENTRAL PRESS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. SANDESH RAJA, ADV. SMT.DAISY THAMPI. THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/02/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON C.M.P. NO. 8737/1999 IN O.P. NO. 5137/1999-J DISMISSED 08/02/2008. SD/- P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE G.O. (MS). NO. 202/87/H. EDN. DTD. 16/07/1987 FIXING THE QUALIFICATIONS AND METHOD OF APPOINTMENT OF OFFSET PRINTERS. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 18/08/1995 ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE R.2. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE R.2. DTD. 04/12/1996. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE MEMO DT. 29/11/1997 FROM THE DY. SUPDT., GOVERNMENT PRESSES. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN O.P. NO. 21273/97-G DTD. 15/06/1998. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER OF THE DIVISION BENCH OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN C.M.P. 3846/98 IN W.A. 1435/98 DT. 22/07/98. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 08/02/99 OF THE R.2. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 25/01/99 OF THE P.1. BEFORE R.2. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// prv. P.N. RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------------------------------------------- O.P.NO.5137 OF 1999-J -------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of February, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioners were advised for appointment as Printer Gr- II on 20.5.1988. The 1st petitioner joined duty as Printer Gr-II on 10.9.1988 and the 2nd petitioner on 27.9.1988. The 1st respondent was advised for appointment as Printer Gr-II on 4.8.1988 and he joined duty in the said post on 15.2.1989. The 1st petitioner was promoted to the post of Printer Gr-I with effect from 28.8.1992 and the 2nd petitioner with effect from 1.9.1992. The 1st respondent was also promoted to the post of Printer Gr-I with effect from 1.9.1992. It is not in dispute that as per the gradation list of Printer Gr-II the 1st respondent is junior to the petitioners. 2. As part of modernisation of government presses, Offset Printing was introduced in the Government Presses at Mannanthala in Thiruvananthapuram District and at Vazhoor in Kottayam District. The posts required exclusively for the Offset wing were created as per Government Order dated 3.2.1987. Since there was delay O.P.5137/1999 . 2 in making selection to the posts created by the Government order dated 3.2.1987, after including the posts in the Special Rules, the State Government, after consultation with the Kerala Public Service Commission issued Ext.P1 order prescribing the qualifications and method of appointment for the technical posts in the Offset wing. As per Ext.P1, appointments to the post of Offset Machine Operator Gr-II and Gr-I were to be made by direct recruitment. To avoid delay and in the exigencies of service, the State Government decided to impart practical training in offset printing to Printers in Government service with a view to appoint them as Offset Machine Operator Gr-II. Applications were invited from Printers in government service fixing 2.7.1993 as last date. The petitioners did not apply in time. The first petitioner had submitted a belated application on 26.7.1993. However, he was not selected for training for the reason that his application was belated and he did not have two years experience in operating automatic printing machines, which was one among the eligibility norms. On 17.3.1994 applications were again invited for imparting training in offset machines. The last date fixed for receipt of the applications was 30.3.1994. The petitioners did not apply pursuant to the said notification as well. The 1st respondent applied and he was O.P.5137/1999 . 3 selected and sent for training as per proceedings dated 23.5.1994. After training, the 1st respondent was appointed as Offset Machine Operator Gr-II in Government Press, Mannanthala, as per proceedings dated 2.12.1994. Thereafter, by Ext.P2 notice dated 18.8.1995 applications were again invited from Printers for imparting training in Offset Printing Machines. The petitioners applied and were selected and they underwent training during December 1996 and January 1997. 3. After the petitioners underwent training, a vacancy of Offset Machine Operator Gr-II arose on 7.7.1997 and in that vacancy Sri.T.L. Sunny, Printer, Government Press, Ernakulam was appointed. The 1st petitioner thereupon filed O.P.No.21273 of 1997 in this Court challenging the said appointment. By Ext.P5 judgment delivered on 15.6.1998 this Court quashed the appointment of Sri.T.L. Sunny as Offset Machine Operator Gr-II and directed the respondents to appoint the 1st respondent as Offset Machine Operator Gr-II if by his seniority he is eligible be appointed against the said vacancy. Pursuant to Ext.P5 judgment the 1st petitioner was appointed as Offset Machine Operator Gr-II. O.P.5137/1999 . 4 4. The grievance voiced by the petitioners in this original petition is that ignoring their seniority, the 1st respondent who is admittedly junior to them in the entry cadre has been promoted as Offset Machine Operator Gr-I by Ext.P7 proceedings dated 8.2.1999. The essence of the contention raised by the petitioners in this original petition is that in view of the findings in Ext.P5 judgment, the 1st respondent cannot be preferred over the petitioners for appointment to the post of Offset Machine Operator Gr- I solely on the ground that he underwent training earlier than the petitioners. 5. The 2nd respondent, the Director of Printing and Stationary, has filed a detailed counter affidavit. The 2nd respondent has stated therein that when applications for training were first invited in 1993, the petitioners did not apply and were not eligible to be deputed for training. The 2nd respondent has also stated that after successful training, the 1st respondent was appointed as Offset Machine Operator Gr-II on 2.12.1994. The 2nd respondent has also stated in the counter affidavit that in 1994 also the petitioners did not apply for training and that it was only after the 1st respondent was appointed as Offset Machine Operator Gr-II that the petitioners underwent training during December 1996 and O.P.5137/1999 . 5 January, 1997. The 2nd respondent has further stated that on the fact situation that obtained on 7.7.1997, as the 1st petitioner had already undergone training by then, he was entitled to be appointed as Offset Machine Operator Gr-II in preference to Sri.T.L. Sunny, the 2nd respondent in O.P.No.21273 of 1999. It is also stated in the counter affidavit that the regular line of promotion in the Machine Section to which the petitioners and the third respondent belong are Printer Gr-I, Printer Senior Grade, Assistant Foreman (Machine), Junior Foreman (Machine), Senior Foreman (Machine) and General Foremen (Machine). The counter affidavit proceeds to state that the appointment of Printers as Offset Machine Operator Gr-II/Gr-I is only a temporary measure in the exigencies of service and that it does not take away the rights or original seniority of Printers in their parent section. The 2nd respondent has also stated in the counter affidavit that the lien of the Printers is retained in the Machine Section and that Printers who are provisionally appointed as Offset Machine Operator Gr-II/Gr-I are posted back to Machine Section itself as and when their turn for regular promotion in the Machine Section arises and that the petitioners have been promoted and are working as Senior Grade Printers in the Machine Section. O.P.5137/1999 . 6 6. I have heard Sri.P. Ravindran, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners, Smt. Daisy Thambi, the learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent and Sri. K. Sandesh Raja, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the 2nd respondent. The claim put forward by the petitioners is based on Ext.P5 judgment of this Court wherein it was held that Printers who have undergone training before the date on which the vacancy of Offset Machine Operator Gr-II arose, cannot be superseded by their juniors merely for the reason that they underwent the training earlier. The learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 on the other hand contended that though no exception can be taken to the principle laid down in Ext.P5 judgment, in the fact situation in the case on hand, the said decision cannot apply at all. 7. I have considered the rival contentions. In my view the reliance placed by the petitioners on Ext.P5 judgment is misconceived. Ext.P5 judgment was in respect of an appointment to the post of Offset Machine Operator Gr-II, made to a vacancy which arose on 7.7.1997. The first petitioner had undergone training by then. His junior was appointed ignoring his seniority O.P.5137/1999 . 7 on the sole ground that the junior had undergone training earlier. It was in such circumstances that this Court held in Ext.P5 judgment that seniority cannot be ignored on the short ground that the junior had undergone training earlier. In the instant case, it is not disputed that the 1st respondent was appointed as Offset Machine Operator Gr-II on 2.12.1994. The petitioners were admittedly not qualified to be appointed as Offset Machine Operator Gr-II on the said date (they had not undergone the training then) and they have not challenged the appointment of the 1st respondent as Offset Machine Operator Gr-II on 2.12.1994. The challenge now made is to the 1st respondent's promotion as Offset Machine Operator Gr-I based on his seniority in the post of Offset Machine Operator Gr-II. In my opinion, the petitioners who are junior to the 1st respondent in the category of Offset Machine Operator Gr-II in the Offset Wing of the Government Press, cannot challenge the 1st respondent's promotion as Offset Machine Operator Gr-I based on their seniority in the cadre of Printer Gr-II and Printer Gr-I in the Machine Section. The counter affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent discloses that appointment of Printers from the Machine Section as Offset Machine Operator Gr-II is only a temporary measure and that their seniority in the Machine Section will not be affected even if O.P.5137/1999 . 8 their juniors are posted in the Offset wing as Offset Machine Operator Gr-II/Gr-I. It is also brought to my notice that the 1st respondent has retired from service, during the pendency of this original petition. In the light of the above facts, I hold that there is no merit in the challenge to Ext.P7. The original petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. cl O.P.5137/1999 . 9 P.N. RAVINDRAN, J. O.P.NO.5137 OF 1999-J JUDGMENT 8th February, 2008.