IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 14TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 25TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 7391 of 2007(E) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ RAJAMOHANAN K., S/O.RAMAN NAIR, AGED 52 YEARS, TELECOM MECHANIC, TELEPHONE, TELEPHONE EXCHANGE, PUZHAKKATTIRI, MALAPPURAM 679 321, RESIDING AT KADANGAL HOUSE, PUZHAKKATTIRI P.O MALAPPURAM 679 321. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.HARIRAJ SMT.REKHA VASUDEVAN SRI.SURAJ.S SRI.P.A.KUMARAN SMT.VINEETHA B. SRI.K.S.SARATH KUMAR SRI.S.NITHIN SRI.RAHEESH BABU RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. BSNL REPRESENTED BY THE CMD CORPORATE OFFICE, NEW DELHI. 2. THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, TELECOM, BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD, KERALA CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. GENERAL MANAGER, TELECOM, BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED, KERALA CIRCLE, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS K.PHILIP,SC, BSNL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. -------------------------- W.P.(C)No.7391 OF 2007 ----------------------------- DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is working as a Telephone Mechanic and aspires for appointment by transfer to the post of Telecom Technical Assistant in the 40% quota available for Departmental candidates. It is determined by a Limited Departmental Competitive Examination. Only persons who have acquired 10+2 certificate are normally entitled to appear in the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination. Apparently, in order to mitigate the hardship of certain senior employees who do not possess the pre-qualification, the Department decided to conduct a pre-qualifying test for those not possessing the pre-entry level qualification of 10+2. This is evidenced by Exhibit P2 dated 18.11.2003. The petitioner participated in the pre-qualifying test conducted pursuant to Exhibit P2 and has passed the same as evidenced by Exhibit P4. Thereupon the petitioner participated in the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination held in August 2005. But, he was not successful. He thus sought for another opportunity to participate in the LDCE. But the request was rejected under Exhibit P8 on the premise that the LDCE held earlier pursuant to Exhibit P2 was confined to the vacancies in the post in question which arose during W.P.(C)No.7391/07 2 the year 2004 and cannot be treated as one which would continue to be available to the petitioner or similarly situated persons. Exhibit P8 is under challenge in this writ petition. Counter affidavits have been filed by the respondents justifying it. 2. By order dated 19.3.2007, this Court directed the respondents to make available the minutes of the meeting held on 28.5.2003 forming the basis of Exhibit P2. This was apparently with a view to ascertain whether the decision which preceded Exhibit P2 was only to confer a one time benefit to the persons who do not possess the pre-qualification for appearing in the LDCE. The said minutes have been made available by Mr.Mathews K.Philip, Standing Counsel for the respondents, when the matter is taken up today. Clause 3.4 of the minutes of the meeting of the National Council of BSNL held on 28.5.2003 reads as follows: “3.4. Departmental Examinations Secretary General pointed out that due to change in the educational qualifications for appointment to RCs, JTOs/JAOs, in view of changing requirements of technology and the fact that there had been general ban on recruitments since, 1983-84, the vast majority of staff in practically all cadres has now become ineligible for taking the examinations for promotions. Depriving such staff in taking examinations just on the basis of higher entry-level qualifications would not be proper. W.P.(C)No.7391/07 3 After detailed discussions, it was agreed in principle that in all those cadres, where entry-level qualifications for fresh induction have been upgraded, a pre- qualification test of entry level will be conducted for the departmental candidates. All those departmental candidates who possess the pre-revised entry-level qualification will be eligible for this test. The departmental candidates who clear this pre- qualification test in-spite of not having the revised entry level qualification, would be permitted to take competitive examinations along with those departmental officials who possess the entry level qualification. The Committee formed in the 1st National Meeting will work out the modalities/ details for its implementation.” On a perusal of the above notes and on hearing counsel on both sides, I am of the view that there is nothing in the minutes which will clearly demonstrate a decision to confine the benefit of enabling persons like the petitioner to appear in the LDCE for the 40% quota in the post of TTAs, to only one examination notified as per Exhibit P2. In my view, since a pass in the pre-qualifying test has, in principle, been accepted as a qualification which is equivalent to 10+2 at least for the purpose of enabling the candidates to appear for the LDCE, it may not be fair and reasonable to restrict the benefit,unless the intention was manifest and is otherwise justified. W.P.(C)No.7391/07 4 3. For all these reasons, the writ petition is allowed in part. Exhibit P8 is set aside. The respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to participate in the next Limited Departmental Competitive Examination for the 40% quota in the post of TTAs, as and when the same is held. But, I make it clear that this judgment will not stand in the way of the respondents deciding not to extend the benefit to future examinations, viz; any LDCE which is held subsequent to the examination to be next conducted as such. V.GIRI, JUDGE. dsn