Babu vs Public Service Commission

Sreedharan, J.—Petitioner in O.P. 4373/1994 is the appellant. Pursuant to the notification issued by the Public Service Commission for recruitment to the post of L.P.S.A/U.P.S.A. in Alappuzha District, Petitioner, among others, put in application. After the due process of selection, Public Service Commission prepared a ranked list. In that ranked list petitioner was serial No. 307. 70 vacancies of L.P.S.A/U.P.S.A. were reported to the Public Service Commission on May 14, 1993 and another 45 vacancies were reported on May 31, 1993. To fill up those vacancies, candidates were advised by the Public Service Commission from the ranked list. The ranked list, which came into force on June 16, 1990, expired on June 15, 1993. So, as on the date of expiry of the list, namely June 15, 1993, no vacancy was reported to the Public Service Commission for it to advise candidates. According to the petitioner, out of the 115 candidates advised by the Public Service Commission, 33 candidates did not join duty and their vacancies were reported. Since those vacancies were on account of the non-joining duty of candidates advised by the Public Service Commission, those vacancies should be treated, it is argued, as having been reported prior to the expiry of the list. Consequently, it is contended that for filling up those non-joining duty vacancies, candidates from the list which expired on June 15, 1993 should be advised. This contention was not found favour with the learned Single Judge. Hence this appeal.

Prior to the date of the expiry of the list, namely June 15, 1993, appointing authority reported 115 vacancies. To fill up those vacancies, candidates included in the ranked list were advised. On such advice, the vacancies reported to the Public Service Commission have been satisfied. It was only thereafter, i.e. after the expiry of the list on June 15, 1993, non-joining duty were reported to the Public Service Commission. Those vacancies so reported can only be treated as vacancies reported to the Public Service Commission after the expiry of the ranked list. To fill up those vacancies reported after the expiry of the ranked list, the list which had already expired, cannot be operated on. This legal position is settled by the Full Bench decision in Vimala Kumari v. State 1994 (2) KIT 47.

According to counsel, the non-joining duty vacancy should be treated as vacancies that had already been reported to the Public Service Commission prior to the date of expiry of the list. This argument cannot hold good, because to fill up 115 vacancies, which were reported to the Public Service Commission prior to the date of expiry of the ranked list, candidates were advised. Once the advice is issued, vacancy stands extinguished. After the extinguishment of the vacancy, on account of the advice of the candidates alone could the appointing authority ascertain the non-joining duty. Such vacancies, which came to the notice of the appointing authority on a subsequent day, can only be treated as a vacancy that was reported on that day. If that day happens to be a day after the expiry of the ranked list, for filling up that vacancy the expired list cannot be operated on.

In view of what has been stated above, we find no merit in this appeal, it is accordingly dismissed.