IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2008 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 18617 of 2007(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- SUBHAMOLE M.S., LAB TECHNICIAN GR.I., DEPARTMENT OF PURE CHEMISTRY, MEDICAL COLLEGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.N.MOHANAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PRINCIPAL, MEDICAL COLLEGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.T.MOHAMOOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.18617/07 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE HEAD OF the DEPARTMENT DT 18.11.2000. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE SPECIAL RULES NO.G.O.MS.862/DT 27.11.64. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE KERALA UNIVERSITY DT 5.7.06. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.EN2/10233/2006/MCT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DT 10.10.2006. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 17.11.2006. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY FURNISHED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE UNION DT 31.5.2007. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============== W.P.(C) NO. 18617 OF 2007 (N) ==================== Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2008 J U D G M E N T The claim of the petitioner that is urged in this writ petition is to direct the 3rd respondent to consider her for the post of Biochemist. 2. Petitioner was appointed as a Laboratory Technician in the Medical Education Department on 13/4/94. While in service, she acquired M.Sc in Pure Chemistry, the certificate of which is Ext.P3. Ext.P2 is the qualification and method of appointment to the post of Biochemist. M.Sc in Pure Chemistry is one of the qualifications prescribed. The method of appointment is by transfer from non medical demonstrators in Medical College and in their absence, by direct recruitment. In response to Ext.P4, petitioner submitted an application by Ext.P5. 3. Subsequently, petitioner came to know that the post of non medical demonstrator is no longer in existence and this submission of the petitioner is also admitted in the counter affidavit that is filed. Therefore, what she submits now is that as the feeder category of non medical demonstrator is no longer available, the appointing authority should suitably modify the recruitment rule providing promotional avenues for the eligible in service candidates like the petitioner. It is on this basis the WPC 18617/07 :2 : counsel seeks a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider Ext.P5 by which the petitioner offered her candidature in response to Ext.P4. 4. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader submits that going by the recruitment rule, the only feeder category is non medical demonstrator. It is stated that now that non medical demonstrator has ceased to be in existence, alternate method is to fill up the post by direct recruitment. It is also stated that in the situation as above, they have already reported the vacancies to the PSC. 5. Framing of recruitment rule is essentially for the appointing authority to consider and it is therefore for the appointing authority to frame the rule in the manner as it considers fit. In this case, as can be seen from the facts, the only feeder category that was included in the recruitment rule is non medical demonstrator. Now that that category has vanished, it is for the appointing authority to consider the matter and decide as to whether provision should be made in the recruitment rule providing for promotion from among other eligible internal candidates. 6. As already seen, in response to Ext.P4, an internal notification inviting willingness of the eligible candidates, since the petitioner has submitted Ext.P5 offering her candidature, I direct that the 3rd respondent WPC 18617/07 :3 : shall take up the same and consider the application. The 3rd respondent shall also consider whether it is necessary and desirable to modify the recruitment rule so that the internal candidates will have opportunity to advance in their career. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp