IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2008 / 31ST ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 32537 of 2005(W) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------------- KUNJU MOIDEEN, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. MAKKAR, VAZHAPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHENGALAM SOUTH P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.A.X.VARGHESE RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT EMPLOYMENT OFFICER, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, COLLECTORATE,KOTTAYAM. 3. ZEENATH P.A., ANIZA MANZIL, MOONUMOOLAYIL, CHENGALAM SOUTH,KOTTAYAM. 4. JASEELA. V.K., VEERASSERIL HOUSE, CHENGALAM P.O., KOTTAYAM. 5. LAILA P.H., POOPADIYIL HOUSE, KANJIRAPALLY P.O., KODUVANTHANAM. 6. SHAKEELA V.M., MALLEAKKAL HOUSE, EERATTUPETTA, MATTAKKAD P.O., KOTTAYAM. 7. SALIM K.A., NAMBOORIMUKALEL, PERUMBAYIKADU P.O., SAMKRANTHI, KOTTAYAM. 8. P.V. RAZIYA, VAICHAKKAL HOUSE, EERATTUPETTA P.O., MEENACHIL, KOTTAYAM. 9. RASHEEDA V.M., VADAKKECHITTADI, KANJIRAM P.O., KOTTAYAM. 10. RUKKIYA BEEVI K.M., MANGARA HOUSE, ALAPRA P.O., KARIKATTOOR, KOTTAYAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. SANDESH RAJA - R1 & 2 ADV. SRI.SHAJI THOMAS PORKKATTIL FOR R5, 6 & 8 SRI.BINU PAUL FOR R5, 6 & 8 SRI.ESM.KABEER FOR R10. SRI.M.MOHAMED NAVAZ FOR R3,4,7 &9 SRI.T.P.SAJAN FOR R3.4.7 & 9 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.32537/2005 W APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD SHOWING THE ABOVE ASPECT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE CALL LETTER NO.A3/13285/04 DTD.30/10/2004. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE CALL LETTER NO.A3-1443/05 DTD. 10/06/05. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 12/07/05 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 25455/05 DTD.29/08/2005 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.A3/11866/05 DTD. 29/09/2005 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBIT: EXT.R1(A): COPY OF G.O.(MS) NO.265/04/H&FWD DTD. 7/10/04. /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss P.N.Ravindran,J. ============== W.P(C).No.32537 of 2005 ================ Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner has in this Writ Petition challenged Ext.P7 letter dated 29.9.2005 issued by the District Medical Officer, Kottayam rejecting his request for appointment as Part-time Contingent Employee. The petitioner has also prayed for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the second respondent to appoint him as Part-time Sweeper in Kottayam District and for a declaration that the appointment of respondents 3 to 10 as Part-time Sweeper is null and void. 2. The petitioner contends that though he had registered with the Employment Exchange on 17.9.1974 and has passed the S.S.L.C. examination, he was not given his due weightage for his seniority among the candidates sponsored by the Employment Exchanges who were considered for appointment to the post of Part-time Sweeper. When the Writ Petition came up for admission, a learned Single Judge of this Court directed the first respondent to file an affidavit stating whether additional marks were given for seniority of the candidates sponsored by the Employment Exchanges while selecting WP(C) 32537/05 -: 2 :- and appointing candidates as Part-time Contingent Employees and whether the petitioner's case could have been considered along with the general category candidates, and if that was done what would have been his position among those candidates. The second respondent has sworn to a counter affidavit wherein it has been stated as follows: "2. When the above Writ Petition came up for consideration this Honourable Court ordered notice to respondents 1 and 2 and directed the first respondent to file an affidavit on the points mentioned in the interim order dated 15.12.2005. Since the direction issued by this Honourable Court is to be answered by respondents 1 and 2. This affidavit is filed on behalf of both respondents 1 and 2 in the Writ Petition. Regarding the first question whether additional marks are given for seniority of candidates sponsored by the Employment Exchange while selecting and appointing candidates for the post of Part- time Contingent Employee, it is submitted that a maximum of 10 marks can be awarded to the applicant as per the G.O.(MS)No.265/2004/H&FWD dated 7.10.2004. As per the clause IV(C) of the above Government Order Employment Registration seniority is considered and for every completed year 1 mark is provided subject to a maximum of 10 marks. A true copy of the said G.O.(MS) No.265/2004/H&FWD dated 7.10.2004 is produced herewith and marked as Ext.R(a). In this respect it is WP(C) 32537/05 -: 3 :- submitted that the petitioner was a registerent of District Employment Exchange, Kottayam, being a candidate coming within the jurisdiction of Kottayam Taluk. All together 15 vacancies are available in the Kottayam Taluk and is an applicant for one of the post coming within the Kottayam Taluk. As per the Communal Reservation Roaster maintained in the Employment Exchange, Kottayam, the said 15 vacancies have been set apart for the following categories: Community priority Muslim Non-priority - 1, Open priority - 4, Ezhava, Thiyya, Billava Priority - 1, Open Non-priority - 4, Scheduled Tribe priority - 1, other Christian priority - 1, Other Backward Castes non-priority -1, Schedled Caste priority - 1, Ezhava Thiyya, Billava non-priority -1. Since the petitioner belong to Muslim Non-priority, his name was sponsored along with other 9 candidates in the same category. The petitioner obtained 10 marks for registration seniority and he gained 10 marks for age and 5 marks for qualification, which are maximum for the respective qualifications. In the interview the petitioner who score 5 marks and all together he obtained 30 marks. On the other hand, the 9th respondent who was selected in that category scored all together 31 marks (age 9, qualification 5, Employment Registration Seniority 10, interview 7) and accordingly she was appointed. In this respect it is respectfully submitted that the post of the selection was made to the post of Part-time WP(C) 32537/05 -: 4 :- Contingent Employee. 3. Regarding the second question whether the petitioners case could have been considered along with the general category candidates and if that was done what would have been his position among those candidates, it is submitted that, in the open non-priority category there were 4 vacancies and 40 persons have been sponsored for selection to that category the lowest senior candidate is having registration on 26.7.1974, whereas the registration of the petitioner is on 19.9.1974. Hence the petitioner could not be included in the open non-priority category list." 3. In view of the stand taken by the respondents in the counter affidavit, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief in this Writ Petition. It is evident from the averments in the counter affidavit that due weightage was given to the petitioner's seniority. The counter affidavit discloses that the last candidate selected in the Muslim reservation quota had secured higher marks than the petitioner. As regards the petitioner's claim for appointment in the general category, the counter affidavit discloses that the last candidate appointed in the general category is senior to the petitioner. No material has been brought to my notice to establish that the averments in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the counter affidavit extracted above, are in any way incorrect. WP(C) 32537/05 -: 5 :- I therefore hold that there is no merit in this Writ Petition. The Writ Petition accordingly fails and it is dismissed. No costs. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess 23/7