IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2008 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 11206 of 2008(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ DR.THOMAS KOILPARAMPIL, S/O LATE SEBASTIAN JOSEPH, AGED 53 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHRISMAS, HOUSE NO.13/1606(1), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-11 BY ADV. SRI.V.N.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR SRI.SURARSHAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE GOVERNING BODY OF R.C.C. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIR PERSON, THE CHIEF MINISTER OF KERALA. 2. THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF R.C.C REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIR PERSON, HEALTH SECRETARY. 3. DIRECTOR, REGIONAL CANCER CENTRE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. B.RAJAN, DIRECTOR, REGIONAL CANCER CENTRE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.R.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR SRI.K.K.RAVINDRANATH, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).11206/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 4th day of April, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is an Associate Professor of Radiotherapy in the Regional cancer Centre, Thiruvananthapuram. First respondent is the Governing body of the Society. Second respondent is the Executive Committee, which is entitled to fix the method of recruitment to the various posts in the RCC. Third respondent is the Director of the RCC. Petitioner submits that the third respondent is due to retire in April, 2008 and apprehended that he might be granted an extension. He had approached this Court earlier as per Ext.P1. Writ Petition was disposed of under Ext.P2 finding that the writ petition is premature. But, he found that as per Ext.P3 order dated 1.3.2008, Government extended the tenure of appointment of the fourth respondent for a period of one year with effect from 1.9.2007. He will be allowed to continue as Director till the end of the academic year 2008-09, ie, upto 30.4.2009. Though Ext.P3 has not been specifically challenged in this writ petition, petitioner submitted Ext.P4 which is W.P.(C).11206/2008 2 addressed to the Director but sought to be placed before the Chairman of the governing body and the Chairman of the Executive Committee of the RCC. Petitioner submitted in Ext.P4 that he is competent to apply for the post of Director as per the norms adopted by the Management and legitimately ought to have been considered for the post of Director. He also contends that it is illegal and unfair to grant extension of service to the fourth respondent. 2. Learned Additional Director General of Prosecution Sri.K.K.Ravindranath, appearing on behalf of the first respondent, on instructions, submits that Ext.P3 was proceeded by a decision taken by the Executive Committee of the RCC at its meeting held on 6.7.2007 and the decision is extracted herein:- The Executive Committee noted that the present Director is reaching superannuation on attaining 58 years on 31st August, 2007, even though he can continue till the end of the W.P.(C).11206/2008 3 academic year, ie, April, 2008. The Executive Committee also noted the recommendations of the Parity Committee set up by the Government with the Honourable Minister for Health as Chairman. This Committee has proposed to raise the age of superannuation of academic staff of RCC to 60 years. The appointment of Director is through a selection process. The present Director wishes to be relieved if no extension is offered to him since he already has got an assignment abroad. In view of the pending Government decision on raising the age of superannuation and the various developmental projects of RCC currently in its final stages, the Executive Committee decided to recommend to the Government to extend the services of the present Director Dr.B.Rajan for two more years. 3. He further refers me to Rules 5 and 6 of the Service Rules relating to the Regional Cancer Centre Society and the same reads as follows:- W.P.(C).11206/2008 4 Method of Recruitment The Executive Committee shall fix the method of recruitment to such post when the same is created or when the same falls vacant. It shall have the authority to recruit personnel to fill up posts through direct recruitment, invitation, promotion of personnel in the society or on deputation from Universities, Research Centres, or other autonomous Centres or other State and Central Government Departments or on contract. The rules of Reservation followed by the Government of Kerala will be adopted strictly. Nothing in these Rules shall be construed to limit or abridge the power of the Governing Body/Executive Committed to re- employ persons in the service of the society who have reached the date of normal retirement prescribed by the Executive Committee provided that: (a).Such re-employment is certified to W.P.(C).11206/2008 5 be in the interest of the society; (b).for other special circumstances to be recorded in writing and sanctioned by the Executive Committee; and (c). the re-employment is not sanctioned beyond two years after the date of normal retirement, the re- employment being only for one year at a time. 4. It is contended that a decision was, therefore, taken by the Executive Committee, keeping in mind the interest of the RCC as such. The decision is within the jurisdiction of the Committee and at any rate, it is only in the best interests of the Society. 5. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner Mr.V.N.Gopalakrishnan Nair, learned Additional Director General of Prosecution, Mr.K.K.Ravindranath and Mr.K.R.Radhakrishnan Nair for R3 and R4. 6. As I noted above, Ext.P3 is not specifically challenged in this writ petition. Petitioner has only W.P.(C).11206/2008 6 sought for a consideration of Ext.P4 representation. If at all the same will have to be considered by the Executive Committee in the first instance. I am not able to discern any factors which vitiate as such the decision taken by the Executive committee. Same is within the authority of the Executive Committee and it is upto the competent authority to decide who could occupy the pivotal post in the Regional Cancer Centre. Unless there are materials to indicate that the decision is malafide or otherwise illegal, this Court would be reluctant to interfere with the legitimate exercise by the competent authority of an institution like the RCC. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his representation, Ext.P4, will have to be considered by the Executive Committee. Sri.Radhakrishnan Nair, learned counsel for the RCC, submits that the representation has been forwarded to the Chairman of the Governing Body. Submission is recorded. A reply to the same may be given without undue delay. W.P.(C).11206/2008 7 In the result, I do not find my way to issue any further direction as such. Writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs