IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 30TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 20284 of 2009(E) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- DR.T.O. NAVAS, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.UMMER KUTTY, THAZHATHETHIL, RESIDING AT VENMANI, CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA DIST. BY ADV. MR.BABU KARUKAPADATH SMT.M.A.VAHEEDA BABU MR.JAGAN GEORGE MR.K.A.NOUSHAD MR.P.G.PRAMOD RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, GENERAL HOSPITAL JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. * ADDL. R3 IMPLEADED ADDL.R3: DR.CICILIAMMA THOMAS, GRACE VIEW, HOUSE NO.738, CMC-XI, CHERTHALA. * ADDL. R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 30/11/2009 IN I.A. NO.14503/2009. ** ADDL. R4 & R5 IMPLEADED ADDL.R4: DR.KIRAN DEV, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, ASSISTANT SURGEON, GOVERNMENT TALUK HOSPITAL, CHIRAYINKEEZHU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. WP(C).No. 20284 of 2009(E) ADDL. R5: DR.SAJU K.G., AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, ASSISTANT SURGEON AND ARMO, GENERAL HOSPITAL, ERNAKULAM. ** ADDL. R4 & R5 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 30/11/2009 IN I.A. NO.14977/2009. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.P. NANDAKUMAR. ADDL. R3 BY ADV. MR.JOMY GEORGE, MR.SEBASTIAN THOMAS, MR.M.J.BENNY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 20284 of 2009(E) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE KERALA HEALTH SERVICES (MEDICAL OFFICERS) SPECIAL RULES, 2005 DATED 05/02/2005 PUBLISHED IN THE KERALA GAZETTE (EXTRA ORDINARY) ON 08/02/2005. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE OPTION DATED 30/01/2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05/01/2009 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT CALLING FOR OBJECTIONS/APPEAL. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 13/01/2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE GO(MS)NO.107/09/H & FWD DATED 30/04/2009 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE FINAL SENIORITY LIST OF MEDICAL OFFIERS WHO OPTED TO THE SPECIALTY CADRE DATED 16/06/2009 PUBLISHED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE PROVISIONAL LIST FOR PLACEMENT OF MEDICAL OFFICERS IN SPECIALITY CADRE. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 07/07/2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R1(a): COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT LETTER NO.40797/A3/09/H&FWD DATED 16/10/2009. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.20284 of 2009 (E) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 30th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T The prayer sought in this writ petition is mainly against Clauses 4 & 5 of the Appendix to Ext.P1, the Kerala Health Services (Medical Officers) Special Rules, 2005. The petitioner is also challenging Exts.P6 & P7, the final seniority list and the provisional list prepared for placement of Medical Officers in the speciality cadre. 2. The premise on which this writ petition is filed is that by virtue of Clauses 4 & 5, and the point system that is adopted therein, the Diploma holders will get a march over Post Graduate Degree holders and as a result thereof, the very object of introducing the speciality cadre to provide better medical care to the general public itself is defeated. 3. From the pleadings it would appear that even after Exts.P6 & P7 were published, by Ext.R1(a) dated 16/10/2009, the Government have again directed the Director of Health Services to WP(C) No.20284/2009 -2- invite fresh options from Medical Officers, who want to exercise options as contemplated in Ext.P1 Special Rules. This necessarily means that neither Ext.P6, the final seniority list, nor Ext.P7, the provisional list prepared for placement, has attained finality for the reason that as a consequence of Ext.R1(a), necessarily, the Government will have to prepare a fresh seniority list and also a list for placement into the speciality cadre. In such circumstances, it is premature for the petitioner to contend that as a result of Clauses 4 & 5 of Ext.P1 Special Rules, the Diploma holders will get a march over the Degree holders like him. That apart, Exts.P6 and P7 also lack in material particulars such as, qualification, date of acquisition etc. in order to ascertain whether Diploma holders are at an advantageous position, as contended by the petitioner. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner therefore urged that the particulars in the seniority list published are too inadequate to enable the aggrieved persons like the petitioners to raise even objection against the list, on the ground that the diploma holders got a march over them. This according to the petitioner is for want of the Post Graduate Degree / Diploma that the persons mentioned WP(C) No.20284/2009 -3- in the seniority list and the list prepared for placement possess. The petitioner also points out that these lists also do not include the date of acquisition of the qualification by these persons, in order to ascertain the correctness of the points awarded. 5. Having gone through Exts.P6 & P7, and also in view of the provisions contained in the Special Rules, I am inclined to think that the petitioner is justified in the grievance raised. Therefore, as and when seniority list or list for placement is again published, necessarily, the respondents shall incorporate the details of the qualification, viz. Post Graduate Degree or Diploma as the case may be, possessed by the Medical Officers, whose names are included in the list. In addition to the qualification they possess, the respondents also shall indicate the date on which the particular person has acquired the said qualification. 6. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to incorporate the Post Graduate Degree/Diploma and the date on which the same has been acquired by the persons, whose names figure in the seniority list and also the list for placement, as and when such lists are published. WP(C) No.20284/2009 -4- It is made clear that this Court has not decided on the merits of the contentions raised by the writ petitioner against Clauses 4 & 5 of Ext.P1 Special Rules and these contentions are left open. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg