IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.BALACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 25TH BHADRA 1930 WA.No. 1364 of 2007(B) -------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.3135/2005 .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS 1 TO 2 IN THE WP(C): 1. M. SHAMSUL HUDA, DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, HOUSE NO.22/382-B, BYE-PASS JUNCTION, THIRUVANNUR P.O., KOZHIKODE. 2. K.K. CHANDRAN, DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS (RETIRED), OFFICE OF THE CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, NORTHERN REGION, KANNUR RESIDING AT "SARASWATHY", PALLIKUNNU P.O., KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.O.V.RADHAKRISHNAN (SR.) SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA SRI.ANTONY MUKKATH RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN THE WPC(C): 1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF FOREST, GOVT. SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS(ADMN.) FOREST HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. B.R.VIJAYAKUMAR, DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, VIGILANCE AND EVALUATION CCF OFFICE, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-14. 4. H. ABDUL GAFOOR, FOREST WORKING PLAN OFFICER, PALGHAT, "VANASREE", OLAVAKKODE. 5. M. MURALI, ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, SOCIAL FORESTRY DIVISION, KOZHIKODE, "VANASREE", MATHOTTAM, ARAKINAR POST, KOZHIKODE. 6. P.MOHAMMED FOREST WORKING PLAN OFFICER, ACHANKOVIL, MATHOTTAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 7. B.P.VARGHESE, ASST.CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, OLAVAKKODE RESEARCH, OLAVAKKODE POST. 8. HARIHARAN K.T., DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, TIMBER SALES DIVISION, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM. 9. M. SREEDHARAN NAIR,DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, FLYING SQUAD DIVISION, THANA P.O., KANNUR-12. 10. A.K. SALIM, DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, PUNALUR DIVISION, PUNALUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 11. N.MOHANA KURUP, ADDITIONAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADERSRI.K.SANDESH RAJA SRI.V.JAYAKUMAR SRI.T.K.MARTHANDAN UNNITHAN FOR R3,7,9,10 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/09/2008 ,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.Koshy & K.P.Balachandran, JJ. --------------------------------- W.A.No.1364 of 2007 --------------------------------- JUDGMENT Koshy, J. Kerala Public Service Commission published Exhibit P1 notification on 6.7.1976 inviting applications for selection to the posts of Forest Range Officers from among the qualified persons by direct recruitment. Petitioners, who are holding B.Tech. degree in Forestry, applied for the posts. They were advised by Exhibit P2 on 21.10.1976 for appointment subject to Rule 3(c) of the General Rules of the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules, 1958. Respondents 3 to 10 have got only Pre-degree as the academic qualification. They were directed to undergo practical training at the Forest Ranges and they completed the practical training on 21.9.1977 and they were appointed as Forest Rangers under Rule 2(12) of Part I K.S. & S.S.R. 2. The contention of the petitioners was that since they were advised earlier, they should be considered as senior. While O.P.No.10226/93 was WA 1364/07 2 pending, their representations were disposed of by Exhibit P21 order dated 22.2.1995 and by Exhibit P22 judgment, petitioners were directed to be given seniority on the basis of Exhibit P21 order. But the contesting respondents approached this Court and by Exhibit P23 judgment, fresh orders were directed to be passed and Exhibit P27 order was passed on 10.12.2004. Petitioners were held to be juniors to the contesting respondents. The above order was challenged in the writ petition. Exhibit P27 order was passed in pursuance to the directions of this Court. There was a specific direction for granting a personal hearing before passing orders. Since no orders were passed within the time prescribed, even contempt petition was filed. Though hearing was granted, after one year on 10.12.2004, Exhibit P27 order was passed. It is contended that the officer who heard the matter did not pass any order. His successor passed the order violating the basic principles of natural justice. WA 1364/07 3 The learned Judge dismissed the writ petition mainly on the ground that the seniority list originally published in 1984 became final in view of the decision of this Court in Karthikeyan v. State of Kerala (2002 (2) ILR 31). 3. It is the contention of the petitioners that they were not parties to the above dispute and 1984 seniority list was not made available to them. In any event, when the judgment in Karthikeyan's case (cited supra) was passed, Exhibit P21 order was there in their favour. By Exhibit P22 judgment this Court directed the Department to make the petitioners seniors and therefore, the writ petitioners are not guilty of laches especially when Exhibit P27 order in the writ petition was passed on the basis of the directions from this Court and immediately on passing of Exhibit P27 order, petitioners had approached this Court. So, it cannot be stated that the petition can be rejected on the ground of laches. WA 1364/07 4 4. We are not going into the question as to whether training offered to the petitioners has to be excluded from their service and as to whether their seniority should be counted depending upon the date of advice or the date of appointment after training. That is a matter to be considered by the Government. We are not expressing any opinion regarding the merit of the case. Since Exhibit P27 order was not passed by the officer who heard the matter, we set aside Exhibit P27 order as passed violating the principles of natural justice. We direct the Government to pass fresh orders with notice to the petitioners and contesting respondents within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till orders are passed, status quo as on today shall remain in force. It is also pointed out that the petitioners have retired from service. Petitioners can forward a copy of this judgment to expedite the matter. WA 1364/07 5 The writ appeal is disposed of as above. (J.B.Koshy, Judge) 16th September, 2008 (K.P.Balachandran, Judge) tkv