IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 3RD JULY 2008 / 12TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 14930 of 2006(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ S.VISHNU, `ASWATHI', T.C.4/2177(1), MARAPPALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-4. BY ADV. SRI.KRB.KAIMAL (SR.) SRI.V.MADHUSUDHANAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR. 2. P.PRADEEPKUMAR, ASSISTANT GRADE-II, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR. 3. ASWATHY .S. POONKAVANAM, ASSISTANT GRADE-II, COLLEGE OF HORTICULTURE, PADANNAKKAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.D.PREMACHANDRAN, SC, AGRL.UNTY. FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/07/2008, THE COURT ON 03/07/2008 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.14930/2006 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.GA/K2/3712/02 DATED 19/02/2004 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P2 : COPY OF THE APPLICATION FORM. P2(a) : COPY OF THE OMR DATA SHEET ACCOMPANIED TO EXT.P2. P3 : COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTIONO F THE NOTIFICATION (RANK LIST) NO.GA/K2/3712/02 DATED 09/06/2005 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P4 : COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 13/12/2006 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOWDIAR TO THE PETITIONER. P5 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 01/03/2006 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE VICE CHANCELLOR, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY. P6 : COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE KERALA LOK AYUKTA IN COMPLAINT NO.894/06 DATED 19/04/2006. P7 : COPY OF THE ORDER NO.GA/A2/23124/05 DATED 24/05/2006 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 14930 of 2006 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 3rd day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner's case is that even though he got appointment as Assistant Grade-II in the University, he is not given the seniority based on his entitlement under reservation quota. It is conceded that petitioner did not claim the benefit at the time of appointment. However, petitioner's case is that he belongs to backward community, which entitles him for seniority over respondents 2 & 3. In the statement filed by the University, University has stated that petitioner has opted out of reservation by stating in the application that he is not claiming the benefit under the reservation quota. Consequently, University has not considered petitioner's appointment in the reservation quota over respondents 2 & 3. It is not known whether the University Service Regulations permit modification of seniority list based on subsequent claim made by employees after appointment. Since the University has not considered petitioner's case, I dispose of the writ petition directing 1st respondent to consider petitioner's claim in the light of the service regulations of the University and after hearing the affected persons. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) jg