IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 18TH AUGUST 2011 / 27TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 22395 of 2011(Y) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- MANIKANDAN R., S/O.RAMAN, AGED 35 YEARS, JUNIOR HEALTH INSPECTOR GRADE II, PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE, KOLLENGODE, DISTRICT PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.VENKETESH RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD-678 681. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.SMITHA SUKUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/08/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 22395 of 2011(Y) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE ADVICE MEMO DATED 18/05/2002. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ALONGWITH MARK LIST FORM THE ANNAMALAI UNIVERSITY DATED 20/09/2010. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 21/03/2000 ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14/11/2000 OF THE DIRECTORATE OF HEALTH SERVICES. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY ONE SANTHOSH KUMAR DATED 23/06/2009 BEFORE THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 14/07/2009 RECEIVED FROM THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER BY SANTHOSH KUMAR. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE REPLIES RECEIVED FROM THE 14 DISTRICTS IN THE STATE BY SANTHOSH KUMAR. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PASSAGE IN THE FULL BENCH JUDGMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT REPORTED IN 1993 ILLJ 995 KERALA IN STATE OF KERALA v. SREEKANTAN DATED 04/12/1992 IN W.A. NO. 832/1987. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE GO DATED 23/05/2009. EXT.P10: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15/10/2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P(C)No.22395 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated 18th August, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is presently working as Junior Health Inspector Grade-II. He belongs to a Scheduled Caste community and the contention of the petitioner is that he is fully qualified for promotion to the post of Circle Food Inspector. In the said cadre of `Circle Food Inspector' nobody belonging to Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe is available at present, it is contended. In the said circumstances, the contention of the petitioner is that he is entitled to get promotion to the said post in the light of the provisions under Rule 17A of Part II of the Kerala State & Subordinate Services Rules (for short `the Rules'). For a proper consideration of the contentions of the petitioner it is relevant to refer to Rule 17A of the Rules. Rule 17A reads thus:- “17A. Special recruitment from among the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes:- Notwithstanding anything contained in these rules or in the special rules, the State Government may reserve a specified number of posts in any service, class, category or grade to be filled by direct recruitment exclusively from among the members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.” A perusal of the said provision would thus undoubtedly reveal that it only empowers the State Government to reserve a specific number of WP(C).No.22395/2011 2 posts in any service, class, category or grade to be filled up by direct recruitment exclusively from among the members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Thus, it is evident that it provides only for effecting direct recruitment. In this case, the petitioner is already working in the feeder category for promotion to the post of Circle Food Inspector and admittedly, not staking any claim for direct recruitment to the said post. So also the petitioner did not have a case that his seniority was overlooked in the matter of promotion and his juniors were given promotion. In the absence of any such contention and also in the absence of any enabling provision the contentions of the petitioner cannot be sustained. In short, there is no merit in this writ petition. Accordingly, it is dismissed. Sd/- C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS