IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 21ST JUNE 2010 / 31ST JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 23406 of 2007(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. C.V.PAPPACHAN, ASSISTANT COMMANDANT, KERALA POLICE ACADEMY, THRISSUR. 2. K.T.CHACKO, ASSISTANT COMMANDANT, M.S.P., MALAPPURAM. 3. P.P.THOBIYAS, ASSISTANT COMMANDANT, PRESENTLY WORKING AS ASSISTANT CHIEF MARSHAL, KERALA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. KURIKESH MATHEW, ASSISTANT COMMANDANT, KAP III, ADOOR. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, KERALA, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. JOSE KURIAN, ASSISTANT COMMANDANT, S.A.P., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. K.M.GEORGE, ASSISTANT COMMANDANT, WORKING AS SECURITY OFFICER, RAJ BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. NAJEEB MOHAMMED N., ASSISTANT COMMANDANT, WORKING AS SECURITY OFFICER, TITANIUM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.KRB.KAIMAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R4 SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL FOR R4 MR.NANDAKUMAR, GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1-2 SRI.S.SREEKUMAR FOR ADDL.R6 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY. DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.23406/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT DATED 08/03/94. P2 : COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT DATED 31/08/94. P3 : COPY OF JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.6668/96 DATED 17/02/2003. P4 : COPY OF JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.19716/95 DATED 26/03/2003. P5 : COPY OF JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.3750/94 DATED 04/02/2005. P6 : COPY OF ORDER ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT DATED 21/03/2005. P7 : COPY OF ORDER DATED 07/07/05 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT. P8 : COPY OF G.O.(Rt.) NO.778/05/HOME DATED 29/03/05. P9 : COPY OF ORDER G.O.(Ms) NO.146/2007/HOME DATED 23/06/07. P10 : COPY OF JUDGMENT IN THE WRIT APPEAL NO.462/2002. P11 : COPY OF JUDGMENT OF THIS COURT IN WP(C) NO.26783/2007 //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No. 23406 of 2007 (J) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 21st day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T Ext.P9 order to the extent the petitioners are shown as Assistant Commandants on supernumerary basis in the Armed Police Battalion is under challenge. 2. Short facts are that by Exts.P1 & P2 orders issued by the 1st respondent, the petitioners were promoted as Assistant Commandants on supernumerary basis invoking Rule 39 of the General Rules. While continuing as such, complaining of delay in the matter of regularisation in the services, they approached this Court in O.P.No.6668/1996. That Original Petition was disposed of by Ext.P3 judgment dated 17/02/2003 directing that appointments and promotions of the petitioners be regularised. 3. Meanwhile, Exts.P1 & P2 orders were challenged before this Court in O.P.Nos.19716/1995 and 3750/1994. Those Original Petitions were dismissed by Exts.P4 & P5 judgments upholding Exts.P1 & P2. Subsequently, in compliance with the directions in WP(C) No.23406/2007 -2- Ext.P3 judgment, promotion of the petitioners was regularised by Ext.P6 order dated 21/03/2005 Accordingly, they continued in service, their probation was declared and higher grade was also granted. 4. Still later, Government of Kerala issued Ext.P9 order dated 23/06/2007 proposing to treat the petitioners as Assistant Commandants on supernumerary basis. It is on the issuance of Ext.P9, this Writ Petition was filed challenging the proposal to treat them on supernumerary basis. 5. Another colleague of the petitioners', who was also proposed to be shown as supernumerary in a provisional seniority list, approached this Court in WP(C) No.9039/2009. That Writ Petition was disposed of by this Court by judgment dated 17/06/2010. In that judgment, mainly for the reason that the judgment secured by the petitioner therein upholding orders appointing, promoting and regularising him had become final, this Court held that the Government could not have treated the his post as a supernumerary one. The reasoning adopted by this Court for sustaining the WP(C) No.23406/2007 -3- challenge in WP(C) No.9039/2009, applies with all force to this case also. Therefore, for the reason as assigned in the judgment in WP(C) No.9039/2009, this writ petition deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, Ext.P9 to the extent it proposes to treat the petitioners as supernumerary Assistant Commandants cannot be sustained and is set aside. The petitioners will be entitled to pay consequential benefits. This writ petition is allowed as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg