IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2010 / 4TH ASHADHA 1932 WA.No. 803 of 2010() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.10062/2010 Dated 07/04/2010 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONERS 1,3, 6 -------------------------------- 1. M.R.SASI, S/O.M.S.RAMAN, AGED 48 YEARS, TRACTOR DRIVER GRADE II, CAMPUS DEVELOPMENT OFFICE, VELLAYANIKKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. SIVADHATHAN.K.P., S/O.K.AMBADI, AGED 50 YEARS, TRACTOR DRIVER GRADE II, REGIONAL AGRICULTURE RESEARCH STATION, PEELIGODE, KASARGODE DISTRICT. 3. RAPPAI, S/O.PAILOTH, AGED 50 YEARS, TRACTOR DRIVER, AGRICULTURE RESEARCH STATION, MANNUTHI, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED SRI.K.E.HAMZA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA AGRICULTURE UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, VELLAYANIKKARA, THRISSUR. 2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, KERALA AGRICULTURE UNIVERSITY, VELLAYANIKKARA, THRISSUR. 3. SAIFUDHEEN, S/O.ABDUL RAHIMAN, AGED 29 YEARS, CLASS IV EMPLOYEE, REGIONAL AGRICULTURE RESEARCH STATION, AMBALAVAYAL, WAYNAD DISTRICT. 4. RAJEEV, S/O.RADHAKRISHNAN, AGED 29 YEARS, CLASS IV EMPLOYEE, REGIONAL AGRICULTURE RESEARCH STATION, KUMARAKAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2 5. ANOOP SANKARA PILLAI, CLASS IV EMPLOYEE, REGIONAL AGRICULTURE RESEARCH STATION, KUMARAKAM, KOTTAYAM. 6. PRADEEPKUMAR.S, S/O.SREEDHARAN NAIR, AGED 34 YEARS, CLASS IV EMPLOYEE, ENGINEERING SUB DIVISION (CIVIL), P.O.VELLAYANI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 7. SANTHOSH KUMAR.R, S/O.V.RAGHU @ APPUKUTTAN, AGED 32 YEARS, CLASS IV EMPLOYEE, NARP (SR), COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, P.O.VELLAYINI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 8. VIJAYAKUMAR, S/O.PALAYYAN, AGED 31 YEARS, CLASS IV EMPLOYEE, COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, POST VELLAYINI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 9. PRAMOD.M, S/O.P.KRISHNAN, AGED 37 YEARS, CLASS IV EMPLOYEE, COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, PADANNAKADU, KASARGODE DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.K.P.MUJEEB, SC, KERALA AGRI UNIVER FOR R1 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/06/2010, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 10099 OF 2010 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, & P.S. GOPINATHAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------- W.A. No. 803 of 2010 & W.P.C. No. 10099 of 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. In the connected Writ Appeal and Writ Petition petitioners were internal candidates in the University for selection to the post of driver for light motor vehicles. We have heard counsel appearing for the petitioners and standing counsel appearing for the University. 2. Admittedly 50% of the driver's post is reserved for in-house candidates some of whom regularly employed as Tractor drivers are occasionally engaged as drivers in other vehicles. Petitioners' case is that they were subjected to "H" test as a first step. Since they did not qualify in the preliminary test, they were not allowed to participate in the other tests, including interview. Even though various allegations were made about the constitution of the Board, want of experts in the selection team, etc., standing counsel for the University filed a detailed statement stating the persons involved in selection including experts. Even though we feel the right course could have been to take a motor WA 803/10 & WPC 10099/10 2 vehicle inspector, University could not avail the service of motor vehicle inspector, because Transport Commissioner did not allot a person. Therefore experts from KSRTC were called. We do not find any ground to interfere with the denial of further opportunity to the petitioners because in the basic and preliminary test petitioners admittedly failed. However, since vacancies are reserved for internal candidates, it is for the petitioners and others rejected to get further experience in driving and participate in the next test. If vacancies continue to be there, we feel the University should in another six months' time conduct another test only for the internal candidates so that whoever has improved can be selected subject to their eligibility to be proved in another selection process, including interview. Writ Appeal and Writ Petition are disposed of with the above observation. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (P.S. GOPINATHAN) Judge. kk WA 803/10 & WPC 10099/10 3