IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 6TH JUNE 2011 / 16TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 2722 of 2010(M) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN S/O. APPUKUTTY, E-27, K.A.U. QUARTERS, VETANARY CAMPUS, MANNUTHY, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.DILIP J. AKKARA RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, REP.BY REGISTRAR, OFFICE OF KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, K.A.U.P.O., VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR. 2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, K.A.U. P.O., VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR. 3. P.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR, BUS ATTENDANT, GRADE II, K.A.U. P.O., MANNUTHY, THRISSUR. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.P.MUJEEB, SC, KERALA AGRI UNIVERSITY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts 2/- -2- WP(C)NO.2722/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 3/1/03. P2 COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.GA/B2/37483/02 DATED 20/12/02. P3 COPY OF THE PAGE 1 OF PETITIONER'S SSLC BOOK. P4 COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.GA/K3/37483/02 DATED 2/8/03. P5 COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN W.A.NO.2209/06,W.A.NO.2223/06 & 829/07. P6 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.GA/B2/32133/03 DATED 15/10/09. P7 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.GA/B2/32133/03 (II) DATED 28/11/09. P8 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15/12/09. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R1(A) COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IS DATED 31/7/2006 IS PRODUCED. R1(B) COPY OF THE UNIVERSITY LETTER DATED 14/01/2010. /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.2722/2010-M ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 6th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved by the denial of appointment as Bus Attendant Grade-II. He is one of the Class-IV employees of the University. Applications were invited as per Ext.P2 Circular for the said post. It is the case of the petitioner that he had the required academic qualification and the other criteria prescribed in the Circular. On completion of the selection process, he was appointed as Bus Attendar and he joined service also. It appears that the selection and appointment of various persons were set aside by this Court in W.P.(C).No.4999/2004 and connected cases which was the subject matter of W.A.No.2209/2006 and connected cases. Thereafter, applications were invited as per Ext.P6 and a fresh interview was conducted. 2. The petitioner raises mainly two contentions; one that even Class-III employees have been given appointment which is against the prescriptions in Ext.P6 that Class-IV employees alone are entitled for W.P.(C). No.2722/2010 -:2:- promotion. Next one is that the petitioner is a scheduled caste and he has not been given the benefit of reservation. 3. Respondents have filed a statement. It is pointed out in the statement that subsequent selection was completed in the light of the directions issued by this Court. It is also pointed out that already the petitioner has been given reply as per Ext.R1(b) stating that he had to be reverted since persons who were admittedly senior to him had to be promoted and that his claim will be considered in terms of seniority. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that actually no interview was conducted and the statement filed does not give an answer to the complaint filed by the petitioner that Class-III employees were also appointed. A reading of the statement shows that there is no answer to the said contention. The further claim is with regard to the applicability of the principles of reservation. W.P.(C). No.2722/2010 -:3:- 5. The learned Standing Counsel for the University submitted that the petitioner will get 19th turn and he is expected to be appointed in March 2012. The learned Counsel also pointed out that the petitioner is now under suspension. 6. In the communication Ext.R1(b) what is pointed out is that he will be considered in terms of seniority. His allegation that persons from Class-III is promoted is not answered and further, there is no answer to the plea for applying the principles of reservation. 7. In that view of the matter, after considering all the aspects raised by the petitioner, a further reply will be given to be petitioner within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. Since it is pointed out that he is considered in the 19th turn, the same will also be considered, if he is reinstated in service, after cancelling the suspension. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. Sd/- (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms