Prasad P.S vs Reshma.M.Raj

A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, J.

This O.P.(KAT) has been preferred against the interim order dated 14.12.2022 in M.A.(EKM).No.2192 of 2022 in O.A. (EKM).No.1082 of 2022. Briefly stated, the grievance of the petitioner, who is the 1st respondent in the O.A. aforementioned, is regarding an order passed by the tribunal vacating an earlier order that was passed in his favour in the O.A. which prevented the advice of the 1st respondent herein to the post of Range Forest Officer based on the position of the said respondent in the rank list prepared by the Kerala Public Service Commission [PSC]. It is the case of the petitioner that while the stay operating in his favour had prevented the PSC from advising the 1st respondent to the post, the said stay petition was vacated at the instance of the 1st respondent who had pointed out that on account of the stay granted by the Tribunal, the said respondent was effectively deprived of her right to join the post and to undergo the in-service training that was scheduled on 19.12.2022. The urgency projected by the 1st respondent in the M.A. preferred by her for vacating the interim order was that the training session was to commence shortly and the operation of the stay ought not to prevent her from joining the said training process.

The Tribunal, vide the impugned order, modified the earlier interim order of stay granted by it and permitted the State to provisionally appoint the 1st respondent herein based on the advice issued by the PSC subject to the outcome of the Original Application. It was made clear that the appointment order issued would specify that it is purely provisional and subject to the outcome of the Original Application, and further that it was liable to be revoked if it was ultimately found that she was not entitled to the rank assigned to her in the rank list.

Before us, it is the contention of the Sri.Elvin Peter P.J., the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Tribunal ought not to have vacated the earlier interim order that was issued in favour of the petitioner herein more so when the pleadings in the O.A. were complete, and the short question that remained to be considered by the Tribunal was the correctness of the rank assigned to the 1st respondent in the rank list prepared by the PSC. Taking note of the said contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner but finding that there is no scope for interference with the interim order passed by the Tribunal in the instant case inasmuch as it does not prejudice the interest of the applicant in the O.A., and further that the 1st respondent would have already commenced her in-service training in the post in question on 19.12.2022, we deem it appropriate to dismiss this O.P.(KAT), but making it clear that the Tribunal shall endeavour to dispose the O.A. itself finally within an outer time limit of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The O.P.(KAT) is dismissed.