IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2009 / 17TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 30121 of 2007(J) -------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. SHRI PRADEEP M., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, ELECTRONICS, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, CHERTHALA. 2. SHRI SHANAVAS K.T., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, ELECTRONICS, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, KALLUPARA. 3. SHRI BHADRAN V., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, ELECTRONICS, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, KARUNAGAPPALLY. 4. SHRI SUNIL T.T., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, ELECTRONICS, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, ATTINGAL. 5. SHRI MANILAL D.L., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, COMPUTER SCIENCE, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, KOTTARAKKARA. 6. SHRI K.SUNIL KUMAR, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, MECHANICAL, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, ADOOR. BY ADV. MR.S.RAMESH BABU. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. INSTITUTE OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, PRAJOE TOWERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, TRIVANDRUM-14. W.P.(C). NO.30121/2007-J: 2. SMT. BINSU J. KAILATHE, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, ELECTRONICS, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, CHENGANNUR. 3. SMT. SMITHA DHARAN, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, COMPUTER SCIENCE, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, CHENGANNUR. 4. SHRI RAJESH V.G., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, MECHANICAL, MODEL ENGINEERING COLLEGE, ERNAKULAM. *ADDL. RESPONDENTS 5 TO 8 IMPLEADED: 5. NISHA KURUVILLA, D/O. K.P. KURUVILLA, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, ELECTRONICS DEPARTMENT, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 6. JAYADAS C.K., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, ELECTRONICS DEPARTMENT, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, KALLOOPPARA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 7. PREETHA THERESA JOY, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, COMPUTOR SCIENCE, MODEL ENGINEERING COLLEGE, TRIKKAKKARA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 8. MURALIMOHANAN, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, COMPUTER SCIENCE, MODEL ENGINEERING COLLEGE, TRIKKAKKARA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. *ARE IMPLEADED AS ADDL. RESPONDENTS 5 TO 8 AS PER ORDER DTD. 25/10/07 IN I.A. NO. 14283/07. *ADDL. RESPONDENTS 9 TO 35 IMPLEADED: 9. LAILA.D, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN ELECTRONICS, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, ADOOR, MANAKALA.P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DIST. W.P.(C). NO.30121/2007-J: 10. DEEPA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN ELECTRONICS, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, KARUNAGAPPALLY. 11. DEEPA.J, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN ELECTRONICS, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, CHENGANNUR. 12. SARA JACOB, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN ELECTRONICS, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, KALLOOPARA, KADAMANKULAM.P.O – 689 603. 13. JOBYMOL JACOB, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN ELECTRONICS, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, KALLOOPARA, KADAMANKULAM.P.O - 689 603. 14. ASHOK KUMAR T, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN ELECTRONICS, MODEL ENGINEERING COLLEGE, B.M.C. P.O., THRIKKAKARA. 15. VINU THOMAS, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN ELECTRONICS, MODEL ENGINEERING COLLEGE, B.M.C. P.O., THRIKKAKARA. 16. SUMITHA MATHEW, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN ELECTRONICS, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, PALLIPURAM.P.O., CHERTHALA – 688 541. 17. SHIJI T.P., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN ELECTRONICS, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, POONJAR. 18. PHILIP CHERIAN, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN ELECTRONICS, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, CHENGANNUR. 19. C.V. ANIL KUMAR, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN ELECTRONICS, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, CHENGANNUR. 20. M.V. RAJESH, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN ELECTRONICS, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, B.M.C. P.O., THRIKKAKARA. 21. MANJU S. NAIR, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN ELECTRONICS, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, ADOOR, MANAKALA.P.O. W.P.(C). NO.30121/2007-J: 22. SHYAMADAS, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN COMPUTER, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, CHENGANUR. 23. BINU V.P., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN COMPUTER, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, KARUNAGAPPALLY. 24. MANOJ ROY.D., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN COMPUTER, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, KARUNAGAPPALLY. 25. PRIYA.S., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN COMPUTER, MODEL ENGINEERING COLLEGE, THRIKKAKARA. 26. AHAMED SIRAJ K.K., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN COMPUTER, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, POONJAR. 27. GOPAKUMAR G., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN COMPUTER, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, KALLOOPPARA, KADAMANKULAM.P.O – 689 603. 28. AJIL KUMAR, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN MECHANICAL, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, CHENGANUR. 29. SURESH KUMAR.N., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN MECHANICAL, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, ADOOR, MANAKALA.P.O. 30. SHOURI.P.V., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN MECHANICAL, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, KALLOOPARA, KADAMANKULAM.P.O. - 689 603. 31. JOSE MATHEW, RESEARCH SCHOLAR (PHD), DEPT. OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (FORMERLY REC), TRICHY, TAMILNADU. 32. BINULAL.B.R., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN MECHANICAL ENGINEERING, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, KARUNAGAPPALLY. 33. JESSY JOHN, RESEARCH SCHOLAR FOR PHD, BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, I.I.T. POWAI, MUMBAI. W.P.(C). NO.30121/2007-J: 34. JOHN GEORGE, RESEARCH SCHOLAR (PHD), DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING, NIT CALICUT (FORMERLY REC), NIT CAMPUS (P.O) CALICUT. 35. BINDU.V., ASSISTANT PROFESSOR IN ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING, MODEL ENGINEERING COLLEGE, B.M.C. P.O., THRIKKAKARA. *ADDL. RESPONDENTS 9 TO 35 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DTD. 01/11/07 IN I.A. NO. 14614/07. R3 TO R8, R15, R16, & R.28 BY MR. T.P. KELU NAMBIAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADVS. MR.P.G.RAJAGOPALAN, MR.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, R1 BY MR.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SC, IHRD, MR.S.SUJIN, SC, IHRD, R20, R11, R22, R27, & R35 BY ADV. MR.JACOB SEBASTIAN, R18 & R19 BY ADVS. MR.VINO V.GEORGE, MR.GEORGE ZACHARIAH ERUTHICKEL, R30 BY ADVS. MR.JOHN NUMPELI (JUNIOR), MR.V.AJITH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.30121/2007-J: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS & ANNEXURE: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DTD. 11/07/1990. EXT.P.2.A: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 20/06/1990. EXT.P.2.B: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 30/01/1991. EXT.P.2.C: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 23/03/1991. EXT.P.2.D: COPY OF THE SAID ORDER DTD. 18/06/1997. EXT.P.2.E: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 17/05/1990. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS E1/8878/97/HRD DTD. 13/10/1997. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DTD. 17/02/2001. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD. 23/02/2001. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. E5/9155/2004/HRD DTD. 04/07/2005. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE 80TH MEETING OF IHRD DTD. 09/08/2006. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO. E2/6596/2005/HRD DTD. 11/07/2005. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR CLARIFYING EXHIBIT.P.8. EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE MINUTES OF DPC ALONG WITH THE SELECT LIST DTD. 13/10/2006. EXT.P.11: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 19/07/2007. EXT.P.11.A: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.19/07/2007. EXT.P.12: COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE 8TH MEETING OF THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE IHRD DTD. 09/07/2007. EXT.P.13: COPY OF THE PROCEEDIGS DTD. 12/09/2007. EXT.P.14: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DTD. 04/08/2007. EXT.P.15: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DTD. 06/10/2007. W.P.(C). NO.30121/2007-J: EXT.P.16: COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE ORDER NO. E1/7152/98/HRD DTD. 08/09/1998 EXT.P.17: COPY OF THE SERVICE CERTIFICATE OBTAINED IN RESPECT OF THE P.6. ANNEXURE A1: COPY OF THE SELECT LIST DTD. 06/10/2007. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R4.A: CHART SHOWING THE CHANNEL OF PROMOTION TO VARIOUS POSTS IN THE INSTITUTIONS UNDER IHRD. EXT.R4.B: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO. E1/10103/98/IHRD DTD. 02/12/1998 ISSUED BY THE IHRD. EXT.R4.C: CHART SHOWING THE CHANNEL OF PROMOTION TO VARIOUS POSTS UNDER IHRD AND THE FEEDER CATEGORIES FOR THE POSTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT. EXT.R4.D: COPY OF THE ORDER E2/8341/2001/IHRD, DTD. 10/10/2001 OF THE IHRD. EXT.R4.E: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. E2/8341/IHRD DTD. 25/04/2005 OF THE IHRD. EXT.R4.F: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR, NO.E13/9001/2007/HRD, DTD. 04/08/2007 ISSUED BY THE IHRD. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 30121 of 2007 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 8th July, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioners are Assistant Professors in the Engineering Colleges under the 1st respondent-Institute of Human Resources Development, which is an organisation under the Government of Kerala. They were originally appointed on various dates between 1990 and 1994 as Lecturers in various educational institutions under the 1st respondent. For such appointments, applications were invited by a common notification Ext. P1. A common selection was also made and pursuant to such selection, the petitioners were appointed in various educational institutions under the 1st respondent as such. The Lecturers were being transferred from one institution to another under the 1st respondent. Respondents 2 to 35 were working in the Engineering Colleges under the 1st respondent on contract basis. They entered service in 1996-97. According to the petitioners, they were appointed without undergoing any selection process. Subsequently, by Ext. P16 order, their services were regularized. In 1999, the 1st respondent decided to have Engineering Colleges as separate organisation with separate organizational hierarchy. By circular dated 15-3-1999, options were invited from all Lecturers working in various institutions under the 1st respondent for posting in the Engineering Colleges exclusively. Although the petitioners submitted their option, those options were not considered. Again, by Ext. P4 circular dated 17-2-2001, options were invited for posting in the Engineering Colleges. Again the petitioners submitted their option. But, the same was not again considered. Therefore, the petitioners filed W.P(C) No. 10703/2003 seeking a direction to the 1st respondent to consider the option submitted by the petitioners. (That original petition was today closed by me reserving the right of the petitioners to raise all their contentions in that writ petition, in this W.P.C. No.30121/07. -: 2 :- writ petition). Ext. P3 is the Special Rules governing the service under the various institutions of the 1st respondent. Although, in respect of Principal and Professor, there were categories for Engineering Colleges separately, for Assistant Professors and Lecturers, there were no separate categories exclusively for Engineering Colleges in the Special Rules. This is also cited in support of their contention that at the relevant time, there was no separate watertight compartment of Engineering Colleges with an exclusive organizational hierarchy under the 1st respondent. By Ext. P5 dated 23-2-2001, the 1st respondent decided to implement AICTE packages for revised pay scales for the teachers of Engineering Colleges under the 1st respondent. Subsequently, on 18-9-2004, the Government of Kerala amended the Special Rules for Technical Education Service on 18-9-2004. In tune with the same, by Ext. P6, the executive committee of the 1st respondent resolved to amend the IHRD Special Rules correspondingly subject to ratification by the governing body of IHRD. Accordingly, for the post of Assistant Professor in the Engineering Colleges, the Special Rules were amended thus: “III. Under Category 12. Assistant Professor (Engineering Colleges), the existing qualification and method of appointment is amended and substituted as follows: Qualification i) Ph. D degree with 1st class degree at Bachelors or Masters level in the appropriate branch of Engineering/Technology. ii) 3 years experience in teaching/industry/research, at the level of Lecturer or equivalent. Note: Candidates applying for the post of Assistant Professor are exempted from possessing Ph. D degree but they have to acquire Ph. D within 7 years of appointment to the post of Assistant Professor as stipulated by the AICTE. W.P.C. No.30121/07. -: 3 :- Method of Appointment Appointment by open selection, through Staff Selection Committee constituted by the Executive Committee of IHRD, from among the Lecturers in Engineering Colleges under IHRD. Note: The Lecturers and above categories in non Engineering College institutions under IHRD who were appointed in IHRD service before 1/6/1999 are also included under the feeder category for the post of Assistant Professors. Appointing Authority : Executive Committee of IHRD.” As is clear from the same, the Lecturers in non-Engineering College Institutions under the 1st respondent, who were appointed in IHRD service before 1-6-1999, were also included in the feeder category for appointment to the post of Assistant Professors. In view of that benefit given to them, their grievance in not accepting their option to come over to the Engineering Colleges has been partially redressed. 2. By Ext. P8 circular dated 11-7-2007, applications were invited for selection and appointment to the post of Assistant Professor in Engineering Colleges. In view of the amended Special Rules, the petitioners also became eligible to apply and they applied. By Ext. P7, the executive committee resolved to constitute a selection committee for selection to the post of Assistant Professors from among the applicants, who preferred applications pursuant to Ext. P8 circular. (By Ext. P9, certain clarification was also issued in respect of Ext. P8). The selection committee considered the applications and drew up Ext. P10 select list, which included select list for the post of Assistant Professor in Electronics Engineering, Assistant Professor in Computer Science and Engineering and for the post of Assistant Professor in Mechanical Engineering. The petitioners 1 to 4 were included as Rank Nos. 4 to 7 in the select list for Assistant Professors in Electronic Engineering. The 5th petitioner was included as the first W.P.C. No.30121/07. -: 4 :- rank holder for the post of Assistant professor in Computer Science and Engineering. The 6th petitioner was included as a first rank holder for the post of Assistant Professor in Mechanical Engineering. Pursuant thereto, by Exts.P11 and P11(a), the petitioners were appointed as Assistant Professors. Subsequently, the governing body met after a long time since the previous meeting and considered the question of ratification of the decision of the executive committee to amend the recruitment rules. Ext. P12 is the minutes of the meeting of the governing body, which met on 9-7-2007. The governing body approved the Special Rules adopted by the executive committee with certain modifications. But, there was no change in the method of appointment prescribed for the post of Assistant Professor in Engineering College. Therefore, the Special Rules contain a provision for the Lecturers and above in non-Engineering Colleges under IHRD, who entered service of the IHRD before 1-6-1999 to apply for the post of Assistant Professors. But, while approving the Special Rules thus, the governing body also resolved as follows: “Governing Body further resolved that the selection list already prepared and approved by the Chairman, Executive committee shall be revised re-fixing the seniority of the candidates selected as follows: “The inter-se seniority of the candidates selected from Non- Engineering College-Institutions under IHRD shall be after the last candidate selected from the Engineering College institutions under IHRD.”” In accordance with the same, the amended Special Rules Ext. P13 were also published. But, the further resolution of the governing body in respect of the seniority among the selected Assistant Professors was also included below the Special Rules relating to Assistant Professors, in the Engineering Colleges under IHRD. The petitioners are aggrieved by Exts. P12 and P13 in so far as the same interfere W.P.C. No.30121/07. -: 5 :- with the inter-se seniority among the candidates selected as per Ext. P10 select list. According to the petitioners, the decision of the governing body is arbitrary and discriminatory. 3. First of all, they would contend that once selection is made from different sources by open selection and a select list is drawn up, thereafter, a differentiation cannot be made depending on the feeder category from which the selected person applied. Secondly, there is no reason for the governing body to come to a conclusion that the Lecturers in Engineering Colleges selected as Assistant Professors, should be given seniority above those candidates selected from non- Engineering College institutions under the IHRD. They also rely on the decision of the Supreme Court in Chairman & Managing Director, Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd., v. M. Ramesh Chander & Others, 1995(1) SCC 167. They would also point out that at the time of their appointment as Lecturers in the IHRD, there were no separate watertight compartments as Engineering Colleges and Non- Engineering College institutions. In fact, they would submit that they had also worked as Lecturers in Engineering Colleges at one time or other and they were shifted to other institutions in the exigencies of service. When the 1st respondent decided to have a separate Engineering College service as such, they are also entitled to opt for the Engineering Colleges, which they did, but such options were not considered. In such circumstances, the petitioners would contend that the decision of the governing body is clearly arbitrary and discriminatory. 4. Counter affidavits have been filed by the 1st respondent as well as some of the party respondents. The 1st respondent would contend that the decision of the governing body forms part of the Special Rules themselves and therefore the Special Rules stand amended including the decision regarding inter-se seniority among W.P.C. No.30121/07. -: 6 :- the persons selected by Ext. P10 select list and as such the petitioners cannot challenge the same. It is also submitted before me that the Lecturers of Engineering Colleges who were selected as Assistant Professors by virtue of their long continuous service in Engineering Colleges were better suited for the post of Assistant Professors and that is why the governing body had taken such a decision. 5. The contesting respondents would contend that as is clear from Ext. R4(a) chart regarding the cadre structure in the 1st respondent, Lecturers in Non-Engineering College Institutions were eligible for promotion as Head of Section of Model Polytechnics, and Principals of Technical Higher Secondary Schools under the 1st respondent with further promotion chances as Principal of College of Applied Sciences/Model Polytechnics and as Deputy Director of Regional Centers and still further promotion as Joint Director and Additional Director and Director. The Lecturers of Engineering Colleges were not eligible for that stream of promotion, whereas they were entitled to promotion only as Assistant Professor, Professor and then Joint Director onwards. They would contend that the petitioners opted for the stream prescribed for them and they became Principals of Technical Higher Secondary School and Head of Section. Having chosen to opt for that stream, the petitioners cannot now contend that they are also entitled to be treated equally like Lecturers of Engineering Colleges. In fact, it is because of the amendment of the Special Rules making persons like the petitioners also eligible to apply for open selection as Assistant Professors, they are not aggrieved by non-consideration of their options for being shifted to Engineering Colleges. On that reasoning, the party respondents would support Exts.P12 and P13. 6. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 7. It is not disputed before me that originally in the IHRD, there W.P.C. No.30121/07. -: 7 :- were no separate services as Engineering College service and Non- Engineering College service in respect of the educational institutions under the IHRD. It is also admitted before me that prior to 1999, the selection of Lectures for all institutions were common. The contention of the petitioners that such selected Lecturers were working in various institutions including Engineering Colleges and such postings were inter changeable is also not disputed by the respondents. That being so, when the 1st respondent decided to have two separate watertight compartments known as Engineering College Service and Non-Engineering College Service, the petitioners were entitled to opt to come over to the Engineering College Service. In fact, the IHRD themselves invited such options. The contention of the petitioners that they submitted options is not disputed also. No reason whatsoever is forthcoming from the 1st respondent as to why the options of the petitioners were not considered. I am of opinion that the contentions of the petitioners have to be appreciated in that background. 7. As per the amended Special Rules, for appointment as Assistant professors, no preference is provided for Lecturers of Engineering Colleges. The selection to the post of Assistant Professor is by direct recruitment. Both Lecturers in Engineering Colleges under IHRD and Lecturers in Non-Engineering Colleges under the IHRD who entered IHRD service before 1-6-1999 are equally entitled to be considered for appointment by direct recruitment to the post of Assistant Professor. After considering their applications for direct recruitment by Ext. P10, the selection committee drew up the rank list. It is interesting to note that despite the contention of the respondents that by virtue of their long experience in the Engineering Colleges as Lecturers they were superior to the petitioners, the selection committee did not find them superior to the petitioners and W.P.C. No.30121/07. -: 8 :- the petitioners were given higher rank than the party respondents. It defies all logic as to why after such selection by direct recruitment, how differentiation can be made in the matter of assigning seniority by putting Lecturers of Engineering Colleges who were selected as Assistant Professors, above those selected from among Lecturers of Non-Engineering Colleges, notwithstanding their rank in the select list. Absolutely, no reason whatsoever for such a stand is discernible either in Ext. P12 or Ext. P13. Apart from the contention that by virtue of the long service as Lecturers in Engineering Colleges, the Lecturers of Engineering Colleges were superior in quality to the petitioners, no other reason whatsoever is mentioned in the counter affidavits also. In this connection, it must be noted that the petitioners also worked for quite some time in the Engineering Colleges as Lecturers. It was not because of their volition that they were shifted to other institutions. It was done purely in the exigencies of service by the 1st respondent themselves. That being so, the decision of the governing body to put Assistant Professors who were selected from Lecturers of Engineering Colleges above those selected from non- Engineering Colleges is clearly arbitrary and discriminatory, violating the fundamental rights of the petitioners. Even if the decision to change the inter-se seniority among the selected Assistant Professors taken by the governing body is part of the Special Rules themselves, which itself I am not satisfied, the Rules to that extent is arbitrary and discriminatory and liable to be struck down as such. Special Rules cannot govern the seniority list. Seniority depends on the rank obtained by the candidates in the selection by direct recruitment. In the decision in Ramesh Chander's case (supra), in paragraph 9, the Supreme Court has held thus: “9. As it is, we are afraid that the present method of reserving a quota for the internal candidates in the direct W.P.C. No.30121/07. -: 9 :- recruitment may not be constitutionally valid. All the said posts are, as the rules stand today, to be filled up by direct recruitment. That is why one common test is held for all the competing candidates, viz, the internal and external candidates. After holding a common test for direct recruitment, no quota can be created in the common pool for candidates other than those covered by Article 16(4) of the Constitution. All candidates for direct recruitment have to compete with each other whether they are internal or external candidates. However, in the present case, we are not called upon to pronounce upon the validity of the said rule followed by the appellant-Company since no such challenge is raised before us.” The said decision squarely applies to the facts of this case. For all the above reasons, the impugned decision of the governing body directing that “the inter se seniority of the candidates selected from Non- Engineering College Institutions under IHRD, shall be after the last candidate selected from Engineering College Institutions under IHRD” is liable to the set aside. I do so. Accordingly, Exts. P12 and P13 to that extent is set aside. It is declared that the petitioners are entitled to seniority over respondents 2 to 35 in accordance with their rank in Ext. P10 select list. The petitioners would be entitled to all consequential service benefits. The writ petition is allowed as above. S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/