IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1930 OP.No. 11332 of 2000(Y) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- M. RAVINDRAN, LIQUIDATION INSPECTOR, OFFICE OF THE PROJECT OFFICER (COIR), KAYAMKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.RAGUNATHAN, ADV. SRI.V.V.MATHEW, ADV. SRI.G.GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI. RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2. DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 033. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA. THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P. NO. 11332/2000-Y: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT. 29/08/1995 IN O.P. NO. 8056/1990-H. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. EB2 (EC2) - 27493/93 DT. 25/10/1995 OF THE R.2. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO. EE2/10501/96 DT. 04/12/1997 OF THE R.2. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 12/01/1998 TO THE R.2. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO. EE2-10501/96 DT. 16/09/1998 ALONG WITH THE FINAL SENIORITY LIST OF JUNIOR CO-OP. INSPECTORS FOR THE PERIOD FROM 01/01/1992 TO 31/12/1995 (RELEVANT PORTION). EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 05/02/1999 TO THE R.1. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE LETTER NO. 10792/A2/99/ID DT. 17/09/1999 OF THE R.1. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. prv. S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== O.P.No.11332 of 2000 ================== Dated this the 18th day of November, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a Junior Co-operative Inspector recruited through Public Service Commission. The rank list was published on 12.5.1988. The petitioner was rank No.63. As per the Special Rules applicable the ratio of 1:1 was prescribed for appointment to the post of Junior Co-operative Inspector between the direct recruits and promotees. The petitioner would submit that at the time of publication of the rank list there were more than 150 vacancies, which could have been reported to the PSC for advice from the rank list published on 12.5.1988. However, those vacancies were not reported by the appointing authority. Several writ petitions were filed by persons included in the rank list seeking a direction to the appointing authority to report available vacancies for direct recruits and the petitioner and another person also filed O.P.No. 8056/1990 before this Court seeking reporting of vacancies. In spite of an interim order in that original petition directing the reporting of vacancies, vacancies were not reported. In the meantime, during the pendency of the original o.p.11332/00 2 petition, the list expired on 11.5.1991. Thereafter, the original petition came up for hearing. Despite a contention by the appointing authority and PSC to the effect that since the list has expired, no advice can be made from that list, this Court chose to direct the respondents to appoint the petitioners and other persons taking into account the fact that the petitioners approached this Court in time and only because the original petition could not be heard in time, the petitioners should not be denied the benefit when admittedly at least 44 clear vacancies were available for direct recruits, while the rank list was current. Accordingly, by Ext.P1 judgment, this Court directed that the petitioner and the other petitioner in that original petition be advised and appointed. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner was appointed on 25.10.1995. The grievance of the petitioner in this original petition is that in view of the dishonest attitude of the respondents in not reporting the vacancies in time, the petitioner lost at least four years of his service and the petitioner is entitled to seniority and service benefits taking into account those four years also. The petitioner, therefore, seeks the following reliefs: o.p.11332/00 3 “i) issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, direction or order calling for the records leading to Exts.P5 and P7 and quash the same. ii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, direction or order to the respondents to assign the seniority & rank of the petitioner in the post of Junior Co-operative Inspector on the basis of the rank in the rank list of the KPSC dt. 12.5.1988, as if he was appointed in service in between 12.5.'88 and 11.5.1991 and further to give promotions and consequential benefits on that basis.” 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. In so far as seniority is concerned, I do not think that I can entertain a claim for seniority without persons likely to be affected also in the party array. As the petitioner has not chosen to implead any such person in the original petition, such a claim for seniority cannot be considered in this original petition. 4. Even as regards the claim for service benefits including retirement benefits taking into account the loss of period of service also, I do not think that I can countenance the contention of the petitioner. The rules, as it stand today, do not make a provision for payment of service benefits taking into account the service loss to a person on account of delay in reporting vacancies. If at all the petitioner is entitled to any relief, that would only be for damages, for which only a civil action would lie. o.p.11332/00 4 In the above circumstances, I am unable to grant any relief to the petitioner in this original petition, although the petitioner deserves sympathy. Accordingly, the original petition is dismissed. However, I make it clear that this would not prejudice the right of the petitioner to claim damages in a civil action. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge o.p.11332/00 5 S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================ O.P.No.11332 of 2000-Y ================ J U D G M E N T 18th November, 2008 o.p.11332/00 6