IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 29TH MARCH 2010 / 8TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 29363 of 2009(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. K.PADMANABHAN,SAI NIVAS, KOOVERY (P.O.) CHEPPARAPADAVA (VIA) KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. BALAGANGADHARAN N.C.,S/O.CHAMY NAIR, SUKRUTHANM NELLICKAL, P.O. MARADU. 3. JAINY P.J.,MALPAN HOUSE, ATHANI P.O. ALUVA, ERNAKYULAM - 683585. 4. GRACY, K.V. KELAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, ALINCHUVADU, NENNALA P.O.COCHIN-28. 5. DEENA K.V.,DEEPAM HOUSE, ATHANI P.O. ALUVA, ERNAKULAM - 683585. 6. PRASANNA.M.V.VELIKKATH HOUSE, PONNURUNNI, VYTILLA P.O. ERNAKULAM-682019. 7. ASUMA A.M. CHUNDAKKATTU HOUSE, THRIKKAKKARA P.O., ERNAKULAM - 682021. BY ADV. SRI.M.A.FIROZ SRI.GEORGE MECHERIL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AND THE CONVENER, DPC (HIGHER) FOR HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION. 2. THE DIRECTOR, HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. G.P. SMT.T.B.REMANI ADV.ALAXANDER THOMAS, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 29363/09. APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE GOVT ORDER DTD.6.1.2006. P2. COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DTD.20.2.07. P3. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).No. 10849/08. P4. COPY OF THE MINUTES DTD.12.6.09. P5. COPY OF THE D.P.C. MEETING MINUTES. P6. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF GOVT. ORDER DTD.22.7.09. sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No.29363 of 2009 ================== Dated this the 29th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T In a batch of writ petitions, viz., W.P.(C).Nos.22092/2009 and connected cases, on the very same subject, I had passed the following judgment on 26.3.2010: 'At the time of admitting these writ petitions, this Court passed the following interim order on 12.8.2009; 'Admit urgent notice. Mr. Alexander Thomas, Standing Counsel appears for the Public Service Commission. Urgent notice to other respondents. 2. In these writ petitions, the challenge is against the select list for promotion to the post of Principal in Govt. Higher Secondary Schools for the year, 2009 and the consequent order passed by the Government dated 1.8.2009 whereby the persons included in the select list have been promoted to the cadre of Principals in Government Higher Secondary Schools. 3. The petitioners have raised various contentions in the writ petitions. In fact in the writ petitions, the petitioners have pointed out that there is no proper publication of the select list at all and the action taken by the Government in issuing orders of promotion is without any justification. 4. The learned Standing Counsel for the PSC brought to my notice a letter No. A5V(3)22661/09/GW dated 11.08.2009 addressed by the Secretary, Kerala Public Service Commission, Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram to the Principal Secretary to Government, Higher Education Department, Government Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram. The relevant portion of that said letter is extracted below: “It has come to the notice of the Commission that Government have issued G.O.(P) NO.154/09/Gl.Edn dated 22.07.2009 publishing the select list of promotion as Higher Secondary Principals in the state. The said over describes the list as a select list prepared by the Departmental promotion Committee (Higher). The Chairman of the Departmental Promotion Committee, Sri. Devadath G. Purakkad, Hon'ble member Kerala Public Service Commission has reported that w.p.c.29363/09 2 though the DPC had met twice for the preparation of the select list, the same was not finalised and minutes approved. A select list published without the approval of the DPC cannot be considered as a list published as per the rules. The commission would like to know the circumstances under which the Government had issued the above order without the final approved minutes the DPC.” Therefore the circumstances which are revealed above prima facie show that the select list has been published without any approval of the DPC. In that view of the matter the order of promotion that is subsequently passed by the Government which is sought to be implemented cannot be sustained prima facie. Therefore the operation and implementation of G.O (Rt)3240/09/Gen.Edn. dt. 01.08.2009 (produced as Ext.P9 in W.P.(C) No.22838/2009) is stayed for a period of one month. If any of the petitioners have been relieved in the meanwhile, they will be re-admitted to duty. Any further promotion pending these writ petitions, will be made in terms of the approved seniority list. (Order dt.25.5.04.) The respondents will file counter affidavit without delay.' A further order was passed on 28.8.2009. On the basis of that order, again another order was passed on 1.2.2010, thus: 'These writ petitions relate to consideration of the petitioners for inclusion in the select list for promotion to the post of Principals in Higher Secondary Schools. On 28.08.2009 this court passed the following interim order. “Heard the learned Advocate General appearing for the first respondent, learned counsel for the respondents and the learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. The learned Advocate General submitted that a decision has been arrived at to convene an ad hoc DPC within a period of one month and the grievances raised by the petitioners and similarly placed persons will be considered in the meeting of the ad hoc DPC. Therefore, the petitioners and similarly placed persons are permitted to place appropriate representations before the competent authority within two weeks from today, if not already submitted, for consideration by the DPC. 3. The status quo as on today will continue. Post after one month.” 2. Subsequently an affidavit dated 30.11.20090 was filed on behalf of the 1st respondent wherein in paragraph 4 & 5 it has been stated thus: w.p.c.29363/09 3 “4. Pursuant thereto, the Government constituted the adhoc DPC. Thereafter, the said committee convened its meeting on 29.09.2009, considered and prepared a list of 25 Higher Secondary School Teachers who are eligible for promotion to the post of Principal in Higher Secondary Schools. Incidentally, it may be pointed out that these persons were already qualified to be promoted as Principal as on 06.01.2009. The list of the above mentioned teachers were approved by the Government vide notification G.O.(P) No.213/09/Gl.Edn dated 02.11.2009. A true photocopy of the said Government Order is produced herewith as Annexure I. As per Annexure I, the petitioner in the above writ petition has been included in the 8th place. Likewise, the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.22793/09 Abraham Iype is included in the 4th place. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.22848/09 V.A. Martin has been included in the 18th place and petitioner in W.P.(C) No.22856/09 Valsa N.K. stands in 3rd place. 5. The second meeting of the adhoc DPC was held on 24.10.2009. In the said meeting, the committee considered the grievances of the persons including the petitioners who have filed writ petitions before this Honourable Court. A list of candidates who are eligible to be promoted as Principal was also prepared by the said committee giving priority to merit and ability. However, this list is yet to be approved by the Government since the question of eligibility of retired hands has also to be considered in accordance with relevant Rules. It is submitted that the Government has, principally, taken a decision to review the existing Rules. However, the procedural requirement of the same would consume some time. Therefore the second list of selected candidates can be approved and notified only after the above procedure.” 3. The petitioners would contend that none of them are retired employees and therefore publication of the select list in respect of them cannot be delayed any further on the ground that since retired persons are also involved in the matter, for their consideration Rules are to be amended without which the select list cannot be finalised. 4. I do not think that simply because persons who were entitled for promotion while in service, retired from service because of the delay of the respondents in considering those persons for promotion at the right time, would lose their right to get their case for promotion considered atleast notionally, even after retirement for which no amendment of rules are necessary. In the above circumstances I direct that the decision of the Departmental Promotion Committee on 24.10.2009 shall be published within one month from today. If necessary, within that time the Departmental Promotion Committee shall meet again and publish the select list.' Pursuant to the same, a select list has been published. The petitioners w.p.c.29363/09 4 now submit that in view of the publication of the select list, all what is now required is to direct the Government to make appointments in accordance with the select list. The Government Pleader also seeks orders on the same lines. Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the respondents to make appointments from the select list in accordance with law expeditiously, without prejudice to the right of any person, who is aggrieved by the select list, to seek appropriate remedies in that regard.' Since the facts of this case are identical to the facts of those cases, this writ petition is also disposed of in terms of the above judgment. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge