IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 13672 of 2009(D)
1. HARISH K.M.S/O.MOHAMMED IBRAHIM,
... Petitioner
2. KRISHNAKUMAR A.M. S/O. MOHANAN,
3. PRASEED KUMAR V.A. S/O. NARAYANAN NAIR,
4. ABSU S., LIVE STOCK INSPECTOR GRADE- II,
5. SINDHU K.V.LIVE STOCK INSPECTOR GRADE-II
6. SMITHA V.J. LIVE STOCK INSPECTOR
7. SRI. RAVEESH R., LIVE STOCK INSPECTOR,
8. SRI.SREEKUMAR S.,LIVE STOCK INSPECTOR
9. SRI.RAJEEV.C.RAJESH, LIVE STOCK
10. SMT.SHYLAJA P.K. LIVE STOCK INSPECTOR,
11. SMT.JISHA T.A. LIVE STOCK INSPECTOR
12. SMT.MANJU R.N., LIVE STOCK INSPECTOR
Vs
1. DIRECTOR, ANIMAL HUSBANDRY DEPARTMENT,
... Respondent
2. DISTRICT ANIMAL HUSBANDRY OFFICER,
3. DISTRICT EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE OFFICER,
For Petitioner :SRI.T.V.GEORGE
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :21/05/2009
O R D E R
P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
-------------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.13672 of 2009
--------------------------------------
Dated 21st May, 2009
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri.T.V.George, the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioners.
2. The petitioners are Live Stock Inspectors appointed
under Rule 9(a)(i) of Part II of the Kerala State & Subordinate Services
Rules. They claim continuance in service till regular hands recruited by
the Kerala Public Service Commission join duty. The issue raised in
this writ petition is directly covered against the petitioners by the
decision of the Full Bench of this Court in Radha v. District Medical
Officer (2002 (2) KLT 711). The Full Bench of this Court has in the
aforesaid decision held that employees appointed under Rule 9(a)(i) of
Part II of the Kerala State & Subordinate Services Rules have no right
to continue in service beyond the term for which they were appointed.
Further, the 9th proviso to Rule 9(a)(i) of Part II of the KS & SSR
interdicts such continuance in service. In the light of the authoritative
pronouncement of the Full Bench of this Court and the stipulations in
the 9th proviso to Rule 9(a)(i) of Part II of the KS & SSR, the
petitioners cannot seek or be granted the reliefs prayed for in this writ
petition. Further, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the
WP(C).No.13672/2009 2
respondents submits on instructions that a list of candidates sponsored
by Employment Exchanges has been forwarded to various appointing
authorities as early as on 8.5.2009. For that reason also the
petitioners cannot seek or be granted the reliefs prayed for in this writ
petition. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed in limine.
P.N.RAVINDRAN
Judge
TKS
