AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Devan Ramachandran, J
I am considering these two writ petitions together since they involve the same issues, albeit involving different positions, in the services of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC).
W.P.(C) No.35728/2022 have been filed by persons who want to be appointed as “Reserve Drivers” with the KSRTC and they impugn Ext.P5 order, whereby, they allege that persons from outside rank list - which had been earlier prepared by the Public Service Commission (PSC) for such purpose - are being clandestinely invited, to be granted employment illegally. They assert that this is contrary to the directions of this Court in Ext.P3 judgment and P4 interim order; and thus pray that Ext.P5, to the extent impugned, be set aside.
As far as the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.35744/2022 is concerned, they claim to be included in a rank list published by the PSC as Conductors in the services of the KSRTC, but which has also now expired. They also assert, therefore, that going by the aforementioned two binding precedents, the KSRTC could not have issued the impugned notification which has been produced in this case as Ext.P4.
I have heard Sri.P.Deepak – learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.35728/2022; Sri.O.D.Sivadas –learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.35744/2022and Sri.Deepu Thankan – learned standing counsel for the KSRTC.
In response to the afore assertions of the petitioners, Sri.Deepu Thankan – learned standing counsel for the KSRTC submitted that the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.35728/2022 has approached this Court unnecessarily because, even going by impugned Ext.P5 notification therein, persons who are included in the earlier rank list prepared by the PSC have been given preference to be appointed, provided they make an application within the stipulated time frame. He pointed out that as per the said notification, they ought to have made such applications before 26.10.2022; adding that there is a sense of urgency involved because of the Sabarimala season has already approached.
Sri.Deepu Thankan thereafter submitted that the contentions of the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.35744/2022 are untenable because the rank list prepared by the PSC in the past has expired without any advice being made therefrom. He submitted that, therefore, Ext.P4 in the said case, as far as it relates to Conductors, can never be assailed by them.
I have considered and evaluated the afore submissions on the touchstone of various pleadings and materials available on record.
It is uncontested that, as far as the 'Reserve Drivers' are concerned, there certainly was a rank list prepared by the PSC which has now expired and from which advices were made; as regards the Conductors, it is admitted that there was such a rank list for them also, but from which no advice had been made.
In the afore context, when one reads the impugned notification of the KSRTC, it certainly says that as far as 'Reserved Drivers' are concerned, preference will be given to those persons who are included in the expired rank list prepared by the PSC in the past, provided they apply for the said position. However, there is no such stipulation therein with respect to 'Reserve Conductors'; presumably for the reason above.
Interestingly, Sri.Deepu Thankan - learned Standing Counsel for the KSRTC, as stated above, also affirms that in the case of 'Reserve Drivers', the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.35728/2022 or any other person included in the rank list can be given priority. However, the fact remains that the time frame in the said notification has now expired. I, therefore, asked him whether the KSRTC would stand in the way of this Court extending the time frame to which he submitted that because of the Sabarimala season, a large extension may not be considered confining to not more than five days.
That said, the case of the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.35744/2022 can also be treated differentially merely because the rank list in which they were earlier included has now expired without any advice being made therefrom. I am sure that they should also be given priority as stated in the notification of the KSRTC in the case of 'Reserve Drivers' and that consequently, time frame for them to apply should also be extended.
In the afore circumstances,
(a) (i) W.P.(C) No.35728/2022 is allowed, leaving full liberty to the petitioners therein to make an application to the competent Authority of the KSRTC as per Ext.P5 notification not later than 14.11.2022, along with documents and evidence to show that they were included in the old rank list prepared by the PSC, which has now expired.
(ii) If this is done by the petitioners, their claims will be considered by the KSRTC appropriately adverting to all other required criteria as may be satisfied.
(b) (i) W.P.(C) No.35744/2022 is ordered to the limited extent of leaving liberty to the petitioners to make an application under Ext.P4 on or before 14.11.2022, along with documents and evidence to show that they were included in the old rank list prepared by the PSC, which has now expired.
(ii) If this is done by the petitioners, their claims will be considered by the KSRTC appropriately, adverting to all other required criteria as may be satisfied, de hors clause No.B.1.3 of Ext.P4.