High Court Kerala High Court

Shaji.C vs Subash Murali.T.R on 19 March, 2010

Kerala High Court
Shaji.C vs Subash Murali.T.R on 19 March, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA.No. 212 of 2010()


1. SHAJI.C, CHAMATTUPARAMBIL,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. SUBASH MURALI.T.R,
                       ...       Respondent

2. PRADEEP KUMAR.M.P, MARIYIL HOUSE,

3. SHYJU.M.K, SHYJU VILLA,

4. IYPE LUKE MATHEWS, BINOY BHAVAN,

5. DHANARAJ.K.P,

6. ANILKUMAR.S.L,

7. AJITHA.V.C, VADAKKEKARA HOUSE,

8. THE DIRECTOR OF PRINTING,

9. THE DISTRICT OFFICER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN

 Dated :19/03/2010

 O R D E R
     K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ.

                   ------------------------------
                        W.A.No.212/2010
                   ------------------------------

               Dated this, the 19th day of March, 2010


                           JUDGMENT

Balakrishnan Nair, J.

The 5th petitioner in the Writ Petition is the appellant. He

was included in the rank-list published by the Public Service

Commission for appointment to the post of Printer Grade-II in

the Government Presses in Thiruvananthapuram. The persons

included in the said rank-list are to be appointed in Letter

Presses. But, in view of the change in technology and the

machines used, printing using Letter Press has become scarce

and now offset printers are being used. Therefore, the existing

Printers Grade II in the Letter Presses are given training and

deployed to man Offset Presses, though the said persons are

working in sanctioned posts. Pointing out that there are

vacancies in the sanctioned posts, the appellant and others filed

the Writ Petition. But, the official respondents submitted that

no sufficient Letter Presses are available for accommodating the

WA No.212/2010

– 2 –

appointees, if the existing vacancies are reported to the Public

Service Commission. Accepting the said submission, the Writ

Petition was dismissed. Hence this appeal.

2. As directed by this Court, the Director of Printing has

filed an affidavit on 12.3.2010, in which it is stated as follows:

“3. It is respectfully submitted that a number

of Printers in the Letter Press Wing are idling for

want of sufficient work. Total number of sanctioned

posts of Printer Gr.II in Trivandrum is 82. Out of this

67 posts are lying vacant. Any further appointments

to the post of Printer Grade II in the Letter Press

Wing will only result in idling of more employees for

want of sufficient work. At present Government is

not using obsolete technology of Letter Press

Printing and the Offset Printing Machines are being

used for printing purpose. There are 54 posts of

Offset Printing Machine Operators in the Offset Wing

in the Printing Department.

4. It is humbly submitted that 94 posts of

Printer Grade II in various Government Presses are

lying vacant. Department has taken a policy

decision not to fill up such vacancies due to

insufficiency of work. Any further appointments to

the vacant posts of Printer Grade II will only create

WA No.212/2010

– 3 –

additional burden to the State exchequer for which

no benefits can be derived by the Government.

Hence no action has been taken to fill up the vacant

posts of Printer Grade II in the Government Presses

even though the rank list has been extended till

30.4.2010.”

In view of the above statement, the official respondents would

point out that no further vacancies could be reported to the

Public Service Commission ti fill up the vacancies in the post of

Printer Grade II.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant pointed out that

on earlier occasions also, persons working in the Letter Press

side have been deployed to the Offset Press side and the same

precedent may be followed now also. So, the learned counsel

prayed that the official respondents may be directed to report

the existing vacancies in the cadre of Printer Grade II, so that

they could be utilised for manning the Offset Presses. The

learned counsel also pointed out that sufficient posts of Printer

Grade II to man Offset Presses are yet to be sanctioned and

there is dearth of qualified hands to operate the machines.

WA No.212/2010

– 4 –

Those posts could be filled up by Printers on the Letter Press

side, it is submitted.

4. Rule 3(b) of Part II, Kerala State and Subordinate

Services Rules reads as follows:

“(b) The inclusion of a candidate’s name in any

list of approved candidates for any service (State or

Subordinate) or any class or category in a service,

shall not confer on him any claim to appointment to

the service, class or category.”

The well-settled principle that the candidates included in a rank-

list have no legal right to claim appointment finds statutory

expression in the above quoted Rule, as far as State and

Subordinate Services are concerned. Earlier, when Letter

Presses were being used to meet the printing requirement of the

State, sufficient posts of Printer Grade II were created. Now,

that the said technology has become obsolete and the

Government have gone for better machines and modern

technology, the vacancies in the post of Printer Grade II are not

being filled up by it. A person included in the rank-list can

claim appointment, if only the said post is filled up. In the face

WA No.212/2010

– 5 –

of the decision of the Government not to fill up the vacancies in

the post of Printer Grade II, as the same is unnecessary, the

claim of the appellant for advice to those vacancies cannot be

allowed.

In the result, the Writ Appeal fails and it is dismissed.

K. Balakrishnan Nair,
Judge.

P.N.Ravindran,
Judge.

nm.