Kerala High Court
Sindhu P.S. Aged 36 Years vs State Bank Of Travancore on 3 October, 2013
Author: C.T.Ravikumar
Bench: C.T.Ravikumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2013/13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1935
WP(C).No. 27206 of 2013 (A)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
--------------------------
1. SINDHU P.S. AGED 36 YEARS
D/O.SUKUMARAN ACHARI, KOCHUPATHALIL, KAVIYOOR P.O.
THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN CODE-689582.
2. THANKAMMA T.C. AGED 42 YEARS
W/O.ANILKUMAR, MADATHIKALAYIL, KAVIYOOR P.O.
THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN CODE -689582.
3. ABHILASH P.M. AGED 36 YEARS
S/O.MAHADEVAN, MADITHILKALAYIL, KAVIYOOR P.O.
THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN CODE -689582.
4. LATHA DEVI V.S.
W/O.MOHANAN, AALTHARACKEL, KALOORPARA P.O.
THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT PIN CODE -689582.
5. AJI V.V. AGED 34 YEARS
W/O.ANILKUMAR, ALTHARAKKAL, KALLOORPARA P.O.
THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT PIN CODE -689582.
6. SHARMILA DEVI T. AGED 37 YEARS
W/O.MADHU, KADAMPATUU, NADUKKEPPURA
KAVIYOOR P.O., THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA PIN CODE -689582.
7. ANJANA R.NAIR AGED 30 YEARS
D/O.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR, PAMUYATHUVAYALIL
CHENGANNUR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN CODE -689594.
8. SUKUMARI K.K. AGED 48 YEARS
W/O.GOPI, KAVUMMURIYAL CHUNGAPPARA P.O.
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.PIN CODE -689594.
9. V.M.RAJEESH, AGED 29 YEARS
S/O.M.A.VIJAYAN, MANNAMMURIYAL VEEDU, KAVIYOOR P.O.
THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT,PIN CODE -689594.
10. ANUMOL K.N. AGED 31 YEARS
KARAKKANDATHIL, VADAYAR P.O., THALAYOLAPARAMBU
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN CODE-686605.
BY ADVS.SRI.E.G.GORDEN
SRI.S.K.KRISHNAKUMAR
WP(C).No. 27206 of 2013 (A)
RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE
HEAD OFFICE, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PIN CODE -695012 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
2. THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER
STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, ZONAL OFFICE, KOTTAYAM
PIN CODE -686002.
3. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER (O & R)
DGM SECTION, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE ZONAL OFFICE
KOTTAYAM, PIN CODE -686002.
4. THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER
STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE
ZONAL OFFICE PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN CODE -689645.
R1-R4 BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04-12-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 27206 of 2013 (A)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT INVITING
APPLICATIONS FOR PART TIME SWEEPER IN PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.
EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY 1ST PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY 2ND PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY 3RD PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY 4TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY 5TH PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY 6TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P8: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY 7TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P9: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY 8TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P10: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY 9TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P11: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY 10TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P12: TRUE COPY OF THE SELECT LIST PUBLISHED BY RESPONDENTS IN
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.
EXHIBIT P13: TRUE COPY OF THE SELECT LIST PUBLISHED BY RESPONDENTS IN
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.
EXHIBIT P14: TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 03-10-2013 PUBLISHED IN
DESHABHIMANI DAILY.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL
R.AV //TRUE COPY//
PATO JUDGE
C.T.RAVIKUMAR.J.
=================
W.P.C.NO.27206 OF 2013
=====================
Dated this the 4th day of December 2013.
JUDGMENT
-----------------
The petitioners responded to Ext.P1 notification issued by the 2nd respondent for appointment to the post of part-time sweepers under different branches in Pathanamthitta and Kottayam Districts. As part of the selection process the petitioners were interviewed. However, they were found not suitable for appointment. In other words, the petitioners are unsuccessful candidates in the selection initiated as per Ext.P1. The petitioners now come up with this writ petition seeking quashment of Exts.P12 and P13 and issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to select and employ them as part-time sweepers.
2. Exts.P12 and P13 are the select lists published by the respondents respectively for Pathanamthitta and Kottayam Districts pursuant to Ext.P1 notification. In essence the contention of the petitioners is that in Exts.P12 and P13 members belonging to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe and also Other Backward Communities were not included and consequently, the vacancies earmarked for such communities were not filled in by giving appointments to members of those communities. In other words, W.P.C.NO.27206 OF 2013 2 the contention of the petitioners is that vacancies earmarked for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Communities were filled up by persons belonging to General category.
3. A statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents. In the said statement it is specifically stated that pursuant to Ext.P1 notification a total of 2056 applications were received and after scrutiny 115 applications were rejected on the ground of being defective. Subsequently, call letters were sent to 1941 candidates and 1449 candidates, including the petitioners, attended the interview. It is further stated therein as follows:-
For conducting the interview an interview committee was constituted and the said committee interviewed 1449 candidates including the petitioners. The committee selected 85 candidates for appointment to the post of part-time sweepers and that the petitioners are among unsuccessful candidates. The number of vacancies in the post of part-time sweepers earmarked for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Communities were filled up only by candidates belonging to such communities. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the statement is not true to facts. It is further submitted that the said statement dated 26.11.2013 to the effect that W.P.C.NO.27206 OF 2013 3 all the available vacancies in the post of part-time sweepers earmarked for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Communities were filled up by candidates belonging to such communities is absolutely incorrect and it is submitted that the manner in which those notified vacancies were filled up by the respondents would reveal that the vacancies earmarked for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes and also for Other Backward Communities were not actually fully filled in by candidates belonging to those communities. Though, the learned counsel in the said circumstances, submitted that the respondents may be directed to file an affidavit answering that point I am of the view that such a course need not be adopted in this proceedings as it would not improve the case of the petitioners in this writ petition. In other words, it would not ultimately fetch any benefits to the petitioners even if it is proved that those earmarked vacancies were filled up by candidates from general category as it would not make them entitled to get the relief sought for in this writ petition. In the decision in K.Nagamani Vs Indian Airlines and Others reported in 2009 (5) SCC 515 the Hon'ble Apex Court held that after participating in a selection process without any demur an unsuccessful candidate could not be permitted to turn around and challenge the selection process. Evidently, the petitioners could not establish a case inviting W.P.C.NO.27206 OF 2013 4 interference with the selection and appointment and above all, to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to select and appoint the petitioners as part time sweepers. Being unsuccessful candidates in the selection initiated as per Ext.P1 notification the candidates like the petitioners cannot, in any circumstance, claim for appointment as against the vacancies notified under Ext.P1. At the same time, it is evident that if vacancies are earmarked for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes and also to Other Backward Communities such vacancies cannot be filled in by persons belonging to general categories and if none of the applicants from those Communities were found qualified for appointments the vacancies should have been re-notified. As noticed hereinbefore, in this case a specific statement by the respondents is that all vacancies earmarked for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes and also for Other Backward Communities were filled in by appointing persons belonging to such communities. In case the petitioners are having any case that the said statement is incorrect and some vacancies earmarked for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes or to Other Backward Communities were not filled in by candidates belonging to such communities it will be open to the petitioners to impugne the said action in appropriate proceedings for the purpose of getting such vacancies, if any, re-notified in W.P.C.NO.27206 OF 2013 5 accordance with law by producing materials to substantiate the same. It is made clear that the above observation shall not be understood as one holding that the respondents have effected or filled in vacancies earmarked for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes or Other Backward Communities by general candidates. Subject to the above observations, this writ petition is dismissed.
C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE R.AV