IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 5TH JANUARY 2009 / 15TH POUSHA 1930 WA.No. 1318 of 2005(B) ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN OP.12445/1998 Dated 16/03/2005 .................... APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------- 1. FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, HEADQUARTERS, 16-20 BARAKHAMBA LANE, NEW DELHI. 2. THE ZONAL MANAGER, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, ZONAL OFFICE, NO.2, HADDOWS ROAD, CHENNAI - 6. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENT/PETITIONER: --------------------------------- M. SUKUMARAN, WATCHMAN, FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA, DISTRICT OFFICE, WEST HILL, KOZHIKODE-5. ADV. SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI (SR.) THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------ Writ Appeal No.1318 OF 2005 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 5th day of January, 2009. J U D G M E N T Kurian Joseph, J. The appellants are the respondents in O.P.No.12445/1998. According to the writ petitioner-respondent herein, he was entitled to be appointed to the post of Assistant Grade III directly, while offering appointment under the compassionate appointment scheme. However, since the petitioner was not qualified to hold the post commensurate to his qualification, post of Watchman was offered and that was accepted, and he was continuing in that post. While so, after about ten years, he filed the writ petition contending that quite a few others are given appointment to Assistant Grade III and they were not qualified to hold such post, and the petitioner also should be given the post of Assistant Grade III ignoring the fact that he is not qualified. W.A. No.1318/05 2 2. Learned Single Judge holding that the petitioner was not qualified, dismissed the writ petition. However, a direction was issued to conduct an enquiry as to the alleged irregular appointments made in the appellant-Corporation, some of which are referred to in the writ petition. We find that the same was not within the scope of the writ petition and hence the appellants did not get an opportunity to meet those allegations. The affected parties are also not impleaded. All that apart, it is seen that of the four such instances made in the writ petition, three were qualified to hold the post and in the case of another person, appointment was made in an extraordinary circumstance. 3. Be that as it may, in the absence of affected parties on the party array and in the absence of a prayer to that effect, in a service matter, the writ petitioner is not justified in maintaining such a claim for enquiry and this Court also will not be justified in going to such details. All that apart, it is seen that the writ appeal filed by the writ petitioner was dismissed by judgment in W.A.No.1677/2005. W.A. No.1318/05 3 For all the above reasons, we allow the writ appeal and set aside the judgment under appeal with regard to the enquiry that is directed to be conducted. No costs. KURIAN JOSEPH JUDGE C.K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE smp W.A. No.1318/05 4 KURIAN JOSEPH & C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. W.A. No. 1318 OF 2005 J U D G M E N T 05.01.2009