IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2011 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 29152 of 2009(L) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI, ATTENDANT, KERALA LIVESTOCK DEVELOPMENT BOARD LIMITED, MUDAVOOR P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM. 2. RAJENDRAN U., ATTENDANT, KERALA LIVESTOCK DEVELOPMENT BOARD LIMITED, MUDAVOOR P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM. 3. SANIL KUMAR, ATTENDANT, MATTUPETTY, INDO SWISS PROJECT, KLD BOARD, MATTUPETTY, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.SUGATHAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, ANIMALS HUSBANDRY DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. KERALA LIVESTOCK DEVELOPMENT BOARD LTD, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, GOKULAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.ANTONY MUKKATH. R2 BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI. R3 BY ADV. SRI.P C SASIDHARAN, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 29152 of 2009(L) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 13/06/2008 INVITING APPLICATION FOR FILING UP THE POST OF LIVESTOCK INSPECTOR GRADE-II. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15/07/2008. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION PREFERRED BEFORE THE HONOURABLE CHIEF MINISTER DATED 21/06/2008. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION PREFERRED BEFORE THE CHAIRMAN OF THE K.P.S.C. DATED 24/06/2008. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 29152 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T In this writ petition a learned Judge of this court passed an order dated 20.11.2009 in modification of the earlier interim order passed on 15.10.2009 which is self explanatory. In fact the said order narrates the essential facts and discusses every aspect of the case. The same reads as follows: Petitioners are Attendants under the 2nd respondent aspiring for promotion to the post of Live Stock Inspector Grade II. In 2004, Special Rules were framed and for the promotion post, VHSC in Live Stock Management was prescribed as an additional qualification. None of the employees in the feeder category are having the additional qualification. After a series of discussions, a proposal has been framed for modifying the rule and the matter is now pending consideration before the 1st respondent. 2. In the meanwhile, 16 vacancies were notified by the PSC by Ext.P1 and going by the present Rules, if no internal candidate is eligible for appointment by transfer, the vacancies can be filled up by direct recruitment from outside. This is bound to happen as none among the internal candidates are having the additional qualification and on account of the pendency of the proposal to modify the rule, the writ petition has been filed mainly to expedite the amendment to the recruitment rule and to direct that vacancies to be filled up from internal candidates shall be kept unfilled in the meanwhile. 3. At the stage of admission, this Court passed interim order dated 15/10/2009 clarifying that the direct recruitment shall comprehend only 50% of the cadre strength. The 2nd respondent now sought modification of this order mainly stating that they have no one in the cadre of Live Stock Inspector and therefore they need to fill up the vacant posts on an expeditious W.P.(C)No. 29152 of 2009 -2- basis. In the affidavit, it is stated that initially 16 vacancies were notified and that subsequently 28 further vacancies have arisen. It is stated that since 50% of the posts are to be filled up from among internal candidates, even if the 16 vacancies originally notified to the PSC are filled up by direct recruitment, the internal candidates will not be prejudiced as sufficient vacancies are available to accommodate their claims as well. On this basis, they seek permission to fill up the vacancies notified by Ext.P1. 4. I heard the counsel appearing for the petitioners also. 5. The averment in the affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent shows the existence of 44 vacancies. The proposal in Ext.P1 is only to fill up 16 posts. Therefore, even if this 16 posts are filled up from outside, it will be possible for the 2nd respondent to leave vacant equal number of posts in order to accommodate the claims of the internal candidates, in the event the recruitment rules are amended as presently proposed. 6. Therefore, the order dated 15/10/2009 is modified directing that it will be open to the respondents to fill up the posts notified in Ext.P1. But, however, the 2nd respondent shall leave vacant equal number of posts for accommodating the internal candidates. Order is modified as above.” In view of the said order, I am of opinion that nothing further needs to be done in this writ petition and that the writ petition itself can be disposed of in terms of that order. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the said order. Sd/- S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE //True copy// shg/ P.A. TO JUDGE