IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2011 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 10760 of 2007(E) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. S.CHANDRIKA, R/O.MAVILA HOUSE, CHANNAMKARA P.O., TRIVANDRUM. 2. K.RADHA, R/O.BANGLAVIL HOUSE, BHAGAT SINGH ROAD, PETTAH, TRIVANDRUM. 3. R.MANOHARAN, R/O. KOCHU VEEDU, KAVALAKULAM, NEYYATTINKARA, TRIVANDRUM. 4. T.SASI, R/O.S.L.BHAWAN, KALLOSEKAVU, KARYAVATTOM P.O., TRIVANDRUM, RANK NO.82. 5. ANTONY LOUIZ A., R/O.JAYA BHAWAN, KUNNACODE, VADAKKUMKKARA, MUNGODE, PEYAD, TRIVANDRUM. 6. C.SASI, PLAVILAPUTHEN VEEDU, KOTTAKKONAM, KATTANCHALKUZHY P.O., TRIVANDRUM. 7. INDIRA AMMA C., R/O.OORALIVILAKATHU VEEDU, NANNATTUKAVE, POTHENKODE, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SMT.K.GIRIJA RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. UNIVERSITY OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION (B) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SC, KERALA UTY. R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. RANI DIOTHIMA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/03/2011 ALONG WITH WPC NO. 11698 OF 2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.10760/2007 E APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DTD. 15/5/1992 INVITING APPLICATIONS FROM CANDIDATES FOR FILLING UP THE VACANCIES FOR CLASS IV EMPLOYEES IN THE UNIVERSITY. P2: COPY OF TH RANK LIST ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P3: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 6/3/2002 IN OP.1935/2000 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P4: COPY OF THE DETAILS OF NUMBER OF POSTS OF MINISTERIAL STAFF FROM JOINT REGISTRAR OF CLASS IV EMPLOYEES IN THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, IDENTIFIED AFTER THE DE-LINKING OF PRE-DEGREE COURSE. P5: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 21/07/2003 IN WPC.13159/03 BY THIS HONOURABLE HIGH COURT. P6: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 11/06/2004 IN W.A.1048/04. P7: COPY OF JUDGMENT DTD. 19/01/2005 IN WP(C) 35208/2004. P8: COPY OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE SYNDICATE DECISION DTD. 12/5/2005 EXTENDING THE VALIDITY OF EXT.P2 SELECT LIST FOR A PERIOD OF TWO YEARS FROM 12/05/2005. P9: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 18/08/2005 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P10: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD. 19/11/2005 FORWARDED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT. P11: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 1/03/2006 IN WP(C) 1308/06. P12: COPY OF THE REMINDER DTD. 7/04/2006 TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P13: COPY OF THE REMINDER DTD. 27/11/2006 TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P14: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 8/03/2007 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P15: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION 20/02/2006 FORWARDED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P16: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.AD.AII./1/07 DTD. 9/10/2007 ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss K. M. JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------------- W.P.C. NOS. 10760/07E & 11698/07P ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th April, 2007 ORDER Standing Counsel takes notice for first respondent. Notice by speed post to second respondent in W.P.(C) No.10760/07. 2. Standing counsel takes notice for second respondent. Notice by speed post to Respondents 1 & 3 in W.P.(C) No.11698/07. 3. Petitioners are included in a rank list prepared for appointment to Class IV posts by the respondent University in the year 1999. A number of persons were appointed from the said list. Petitioners are yet to be appointed. There was some litigation earlier. The list had expired. This Court by Ext.P5 Judgment in W.P.(C) No.10760/07 directed to fill up fifty vacancies from the rank list, even though the list had expired. That came to be over-turned by Ext.P6 Judgment. Thereafter, the respondent University has revalidated the list for a period expiring on 12.5.2007. Petitioners have approached this Court earlier and there was a direction to the Government to consider WP(C) 10760/07 & 11698/07 2 the question regarding grant of concurrence. Government, as per the impugned orders in both the Writ Petitions, declined to grant concurrence to fill up the fifty vacancies. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would primarily contend that there is, in fact, no warrant for the Government to arrogate to itself the power to decline concurrence. In fact, no concurrence is required, is what they say. Apparently, the Court proceeded on the basis that concurrence is necessary. It is to be noted that in Ext.P6 Judgment, this Court disapproved of the direction issued in Ext.P5 to appoint the persons on the ground that the list had expired. Petitioners would contend that as the list is expiring on 12.5.2007, unless they are directed to be provisionally appointed, the entire matter will become infructuous. One of the contentions taken by the petitioners is that there are 341 sanctioned posts and there are 170 vacancies. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent University refers to a Circular dated 23.6.2000. But, there is no dispute regarding the fact that once the list expires, there can be no appointment WP(C) 10760/07 & 11698/07 3 made from such a list. I feel that some interim arrangement has to be made, so that the interests of both the parties are protected. It is seen from Exts.P10 and P13 in W.P.(C) No.10760/07 that the University made a request for appointing the remaining fifty persons from the revalidated list. The University is the appointing authority. In such circumstances, the following interim order is passed: It is ordered that the respondent University will be free to appoint the petitioners before expiry of the revalidated rank list, and the fact that the impugned orders have been passed will not stand in the way of their being appointed. However, in case the University proceeds to make appointments from the rank list, the said appointments will be purely provisional. It will not by itself confer any right on the petitioners, and it will be subject to the result of the Writ Petitions. I am passing this order only in view of the admitted fact that the list expires on 12.5.2007 and in view of the view taken by the Division Bench earlier in Ext.P6 Judgment. It is also made clear that in the event of WP(C) 10760/07 & 11698/07 4 appointments being made, no monetary benefits need be paid to the appointees, and the question will also depend upon the decision in the Writ Petitions. These conditions will be incorporated in the orders of appointment. H/O. to both sides. K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk.