Anish M.C v. State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON & THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JULY 2015/2ND SRAVANA, 1937 OP(KAT).No. 346 of 2014 (Z) ---------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN OA.1807/2014 of KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 24-09-2014 PETITIONERS/APPLICANTS:-:
-------------------------
1. ANISH M.C, AGED 35 YEARS S/O.CHANDRASHEKARAN, SREENILAYAM, POIKKATTUSSERY NEDUMBASSERY VILLAGE, CHANGAMANADU P.O., ALUVA TALUK ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683 578.
2. NAZEER S.M., AGED 40 YEARS S/O.MUHAMMED, SAMUDAYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, NELLIKUZHI P.O. ERAMALOOR VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 686 691.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN SRI.M.D.SASIKUMARAN SRI.GEORGE MATHEW SRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G SRI.DIPU JAMES RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:-:
----------------------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTON(ADMINISTRATION), MARKET ROAD, COMBARA JUNCTION, KOCHI - 682 018.
3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, KANNUR - 670 001.
R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER(Sr.) E.M.ABDUL KHADER THIS OP KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(KAT).No. 346 of 2014 (Z) --------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF O.A.NO.1807 OF 2014 DATED 24.09.2014 WITH ANNEXURES.
EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 24.09.2014 IN O.A.NO.1807 OF 2014 DATED 24.09.2014.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- NIL.
/True copy/ P.S to Judge
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON & P.V ASHA, JJ.
----------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of July, 2015
JUDGMENT
Ramachandra Menon, J.
The petitioners are before this Court, being aggrieved of Ext.P2 order passed by the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, whereby the Original Application preferred by the petitioners seeking to make appointments (regular or temporary), to the post of Assistant Public Prosecutors (Grade-II) from Annexure-A1 rank list was dismissed as devoid of any merit. 2.
When the matter came up before this Court for consideration, on the last occasion, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that there was absolutely no rhyme or reason for appointing temporary hands from outside, when persons like the petitioners, who have come successful in the process of selection, have been included in the rank list. Instead of reporting the vacancies to the Public Service Commission, so as to facilitate appointment, in respect of such vacancies, many of the vacancies are being permitted to be occupied by temporary hands. In the above circumstances, the
concerned respondent was directed to file an affidavit as to the factual particulars, also making it clear that renewal of the existing temporary arrangements to the post of Assistant Public Prosecutor Grade-II shall not be effected without getting further orders from this Court.
3.
Pursuant to the above order, an additional affidavit has been filed on 7.7.2015 by the 1st respondent. Paragraphs 3 and 4 of the affidavit dated 7.7.2015 filed by the 1st respondent are relevant and are extracted below:
"3. It is submitted that Government have reported all the eligible vacancies of APPs to KPSC including the anticipatory vacancies for the year 2015. The candidates advised by the KPSC are appointed as APP Gr.II. They have to undergo a mandatory training for a period of six months. For the smooth functioning of the courts the vacancy thus arise is filled by permitting the provisional hands to continue as APP (Prov.) till the newly appointed APPs complete their training, as per G.O(MS) No.175/14/Home dtd.30.08.2014 (A6). They will be relieved as and when the APPs return from their training. Government is resorting to appointment of provisional hands only in accordance with the above Government Order. The details of APPs (Prov.) thus continuing are as follows:
Name of APP (Provisional) Name of the Court How vacancy arise Whether vacancy reported to KPSC Shri. G.Anu JFCM Court, Ramankari Vacancy due to the mandatory training of APPs appointed through KPSC Yes. Provisional APPs are contnuing vide G.O(MS)175/14/Home dtd.30.8.2014 Shri. K.T.Abhilash Kumar JFCM Court, Katappana "
"
Shri K.P.M.Anees JFCM Court, Ponnani "
"
Shri K.Siyamurashid JFCM Court II, Manjeri "
"
Shri. K.Lalumon JFCM Court II, Perinthalmanna "
"
Smt.A.Dhanya JFCMC, Thaliparamba " " 4.
It is also submitted that 4 other Provisional APPs are working in the JFCMCs in vacancies which arose due to the relieving of APPs as temporary Munsiff Magistrates. Among the 4 APPs relieved for the post of Munsiff Magistrate one retired and the vacancy was reported to KPSC along with the anticipatory vacancies for 2015. Among the other three vacancies one is filled up due to the repatriation of one APP from deputation and the other is to be filled up on 7/2015 on the return of one APP from LWA. Hence it can be seen that there is only one vacancy of APP to be reported to Kerala Public Service Commission.
Sl.No. Name of APP (Provisional) Name of the Court How vacancy arise Whether vacancy reported to KPSC Shri. Wilson Thomas JFCM Court, Muvatupuuha Vacancy due to relieving of APPs as temp.
MunsiffMagistrate All Antcipated vacancies for the year 2015 reported to KPSC on 26.11.2014 Shri.
K.S.Muralikrishnan Nair JFCM Court, Etumanoor "
"
Smt. T.P.Jelna SDM Court, Thalasserry "
One vacancy is reserved for postng of APP completng LWA Shri M.Shemina ACJM Court , Thalasserry "
Not reported by DGPr as the duraton of vacancy is not known. Will be reported to KPSC afer ascertaining the duraton of vacancy.
4.
The learned counsel for the petitioners points out that the course sought to be pursued by facilitating appointment of temporary hands as per Annexure A6 issued by the Government and the consequential order like Annexure-A7 issued by the District Collector in respect of the interview, are not at all correct or proper and that the same is in contravension of the mandate of Annexure-A5 Circular dated 21.03.1997. The relevant portion of the above Circular reads as follows: "...... ....... ....... .....
iii. The vacancies on account of leave and deputation with a duration of 6 months and above should invariably be reported to the Commission Vacancies of periods between 3 months and 6 months should also be reported to the Commission if the vacancies are likely to last long and new vacancies are likely to arise.
iv. When there is a ranked list, vacancies shall invariably be filled up from the candidates in that list. ....... ....... ........ ......."
5.
Heard both the sides in detail.
6.
The circumstances under which interference was declined by the Tribunal are discernible from paragraph 2 of Ext.P2 Order, which is extracted below:
"We find that Annexure A6 order has been issued in public interest to see that the functioning of the Criminal Courts are not affected for want of Assistant Public Prosecutors. The 24 vacancies which, arose on deputing PSC hands for training cannot be filled up by a second batch of the PSC hands who will also have to undergo mandatory training. So, the temporary hands are allowed to function as Assistant Public Prosecutors. So, the method adopted by the Government in Annexure A6, that is to allow the extension of the term of the existing temporary Public Prosecutors, cannot be said to be illegal or without jurisdiction. If in any of the courts there is no temporary Assistant Public Prosecutor, the same is being filled up from the open market termporarily by the District Collector. This Tribunal is not justified in interfering with what is being done in public interest. Administration of criminal justice is one of the prime duties of the State. Any lapses in that regard will lead to serious consequences to the public at large."
After hearing both the sides, we find that the verdict passed by the Tribunal is perfectly within the four walls of law and it does not call for interference.
Accordingly, this Original Petition(KAT) stands dismissed. Sd/- P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON Judge Sd/- P.V.ASHA Judge rtr/