Kerala High Court
Faseela.K.A vs State Of Kerala on 22 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 2ND MAGHA, 1942
WP(C).No.16955 OF 2019(T)
PETITIONERS:
1 FASEELA.K.A.
AGED 31 YEARS
SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O.,
COCHIN-682 022
2 SUMY THOMAS,
SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O.,
COCHIN-682 022
3 AMBILY.G.,
SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O.,COCHIN-682 022
4 ANITHA SAMUEL
SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O.,COCHIN-682 022
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.JAJU BABU (SR.)
SRI.BRIJESH MOHAN
KUM.T.S.ATHIRA
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001
2 COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O.,
COCHIN-682 022,
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
2
3 SMT.STEENA STEPHEN,
SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O.,COCHIN-682 022
4 SMT. SHEHENA KUNJUMON.A.,
SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O.,COCHIN-682 022
5 SMT.S. MAYADEVI,
SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O.,COCHIN-682 022
6 SRI.M.V.SAJEEV,
SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O.,COCHIN-682 022
R2 BY SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAI, SC, COCHIN
UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
R3-6 BY ADV. SRI.S.JAMES VINCENT
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
22.01.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).24718/2019(L), THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 2ND MAGHA, 1942
WP(C).No.24718 OF 2019(L)
PETITIONER:
ANUPAMA V.NAIR
AGED 33 YEARS, W/O.M.S.MANU,
SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT,
DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
RESIDING AT MADASSERIL HOUSE,
KANAYANNUR P.O., CHOTTANIKAKRA (VIA),
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
SRI.M.SASINDRAN
SRI.V.VENUGOPAL
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2 COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O., COCHIN-682 022,
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.
3 SMT.STEENA STEPHEN,
SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O., COCHIN-682 022.
4 SMT.SHEHENA KUNJUMON.A.,
SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O., COCHIN-682 022.
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
4
5 SMT.S.MAYADEVI,
SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O., COCHIN-682 022.
6 SR.M.V.SAJEEV,
SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,
COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O., COCHIN-682 022.
R2 BY SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAI, SC, COCHIN
UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
R3-6 BY ADV. SRI.S.JAMES VINCENT
R3-6 BY ADV. SRI.J.MARY HELP JOHN DAVID
GP SRI B HARISH KUMAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
22.01.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).16955/2019(T), THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
5
JUDGMENT
[ WP(C).16955/2019, WP(C).24718/2019 ]
Dated this the 22nd day of January 2021
This judgment shall dispose of two writ petitions, viz. W.P.
(C).No. 16955 of 2019 (1st petition) filed on behalf of four petitioners
and W.P.(C).No.24718/2019 (2nd petition) filed on behalf of one
petitioner namely Smt.Anupama V. Nair. Challenge in both writ
petitions has been laid to orders dated 26.11.2012 and 10.05.2019
pertaining to placing the petitioners below the juniors in the
seniority list on account of fact of not passing the test for the
purpose of promotion to the post of Senior Grade Assistant.
2. Counsels representing parties to lis referred to the
relevant facts which are ad idem regarding the applicability of Rule
28(a)(i) and 28(bb) of Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules,
1958 (hereinafter called 'KS & SSR Rules' for short) in view of the
provisions in the statutes of Cochin University of Science and
Technology (hereinafter called 'CUSAT' for short).
3. The interpretation of the Rules would be dealt with after
discussing the facts and submissions of rival parties.
4. Respondent University invited applications through
notification dated 06.07.2010 for appointment to the post of
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
Assistant. All petitioners were appointed as Assistants. Petitioners 1
and 4 (1st petition) were advised on 11.11.2010 and joined duty on
22.11.2010 and 20.11.2010 (Exts.P2 and P3) whereas petitioners 2
and 3 (1st petition) were advised on 15.07.2010 and they joined
duty on 21.07.2010 and 16.07.2010 respectively (Petitioners in W.P.
(C).No.16955/2019) whereas Smt.Anupama V.Nair (Petitioner in
W.P.(C).No.24718/2019) ie 2nd petition, joined duty on 21.07.2010.
From here onwards, Petitioners in first petition successfully
completed their period of probation on following dates; i)
22.01.2012, ii) 21.07.2011, iii)17.07.2011 and iv) 20.11.2011
whereas the petitioner in second petition completed the period of
probation on 21.07.2011.
5. The case of petitioners as admitted by respondents 3 to 6
are that petitioners in the first writ petition cleared their Secretariat
Office Manual Test (SOM) on following dates; Petitioner No.1 passed
her SOM on 21.01.2012, Petitioner No.2 on 20.07.2011, Petitioner
No.3 on 13.01.2011 and Petitioner No.4 on 20.07.2011 whereas
petitioner in second writ petition on 20.07.2011.
6. Respondent Nos. 3 to 6, in both petitions, were advised
for appointment as Assistants during the year 2011 and they joined
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
duty on the following dates; i) 28.02.2011, ii) 16.05.2011, iii)
08.06.2011 and vi) 12.10.2012.
7. As per the seniority list Ext.P3 produced in the second
petition, petitioners in the first writ petition were at serial Nos.64,
42, 23 and 66, the petitioner in the second writ petition at Sl.No.38
and respondents 3 to 5 at Sl.Nos.69, 74, 78 whereas respondent
No.6 was not shown in the seniority list but completed probation
only on 14.10.2012.
8. Probation of respondents 3 and 4 were declared with
effect from 28.02.2012 and 16.05.2012 respectively, whereas, in
the case of respondents 5 and 6, their declared with effect from
08.06.2012 and 14.10.2012.
9. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners
submittted that though petitioners had acquired the test qualification
for promotion and completed the probation but despite availability of
vacancies in the cadre of Senior Grade Assistants, promotions were
not effected. Respondents are juniors to petitioners based upon the
joining date and completion of the probation as per the impugned
decision Ext.P7 dated 26.12.2012. Respondents 3 to 6 have been
given promotion with effect from 28.02.2012, 16.05.2012,
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
08.06.2012 and 14.10.2012 whereas petitioners in the first writ
petition, with effect from 22.01.2012, 11.01.2012, 11.01.2012 and
11.01.2012 and the petitioner in the second writ petition, on
11.01.2012. A detailed representation was submitted to the
Registrar to correct the fallacy/anomaly but since no action was
taken even the jurisdiction of this Court was invoked. It is on that
background the impugned order dated 10.05.2019 (Ext.P15 in the
first petition) has been passed rejecting the case of petitioners by
relying upon provisions of Rules referred to above. In support of
such pleadings learned counsel representing the petitioners had
taken the following grounds for setting aside the impugned order;
i) The impugned order is absolutely illegal and arbitrary. It is
misinterpretation of the Rules aforementioned. Respondents
have been appointed later and completed the probation later
and as per the seniority list, they have been given promotion
from the date they completed their probation as Senior Grade
Assistant in the pay scale of 16180-29180. The chart given by
them depicts that petitioners were not only appointed earlier
but even completed their probation earlier than the
respondents.
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
ii) The assignment of seniority to respondents is based upon
irrelevant and extraneous considerations rather vitiated from
mala fides, without any authority and against the provisions of
KS & SSR. Juniors have been placed above the petitioner which
is in clear violation of Rules 27, 28(a)(i) of KS & SSR.
10. Per Contra the learned counsel for respondents on the
other hand opposed the aforementioned submissions and supported
impugned order by submitting that clause (a) of Part I of Chapter III
of Cochin University First Statutes 1981 as submitted earlier
prescribing terms and conditions of service of staff of Cochin
University other than University teachers, the provisions of Kerala
State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1958 ,as amended from time
to time, shall mutatis mutandis apply to all the university
employees. The promotion of the petitioners was done as per the
provisions of the aforementioned Rules. Though vacancies were
available for promotion to the post of Senior Grade Assistant, the
protection period of one year on duty by virtue of Rule 28(a)(i) of KS
& SSR in respect of the petitioners was over. Respondents 3 to 6
acquired the test qualification for both probation and promotion
within the first year of their service and they were having the right
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
of protection from being superseded by the inter university
transferees as well as unqualified petitioners, who became juniors. It
was in that background, respondents were placed above the
petitioners. Petitioners failed to acquire the mandatory test
qualification within the time and as and when the vacancies occurred
in the higher post, nor, given the protection or the seniority while
effecting promotion. They had lost their claim on account of not
passing the obligatory test for promotion within the protection
period of one year or had made any complaints against the
placement of inter university transferees above them. It was
admitted that vacancies in the higher post were listed but, since
failed to acquire mandatory test qualification, were not promoted
and were considered for promotion only after acquiring mandatory
test. On the other hand, respondents 3 to 6, who were juniors to
petitioners in the category of Assistant passed obligatory tests
during the period prescribed for probation and granted promotion
with effect from the date of declaration of their promotion in
accordance with KS & SSR Rules, 1958.
11. Private respondents represented by the counsel also
supported their promotion adopting the arguments submitted on
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
behalf of the university. They also added that the date of joining
would not determine the seniority for claiming promotion to the
higher post; only when all the formalities are complied with by
completion of the probation period and securing test qualification for
further promotion the date of joining would be relevant. All
petitioners including other 27 employees qualified both probation
and promotion ahead of petitioners and consequently became
seniors to them. The order of promotion are strictly in compliance
with the provisions of Rule 28(a)(i) and also 28(bb) and urges this
Court for dismissal of this writ petition.
12. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and
appraised the paper book. At this stage, I would be extracting Rule
28(a)(i) as well as Rule 28(bb) of KS & SSR Rules, 1958:
"28. (a) Promotion. (i) Except in the case of appointment to the
posts of Heads of Department no member of a service or class
of a service shall be eligible for promotion from the category in
which he was appointed to the service unless he has
satisfactorily completed his probation in that category: Provided
that a probationer in a class, category or grade shall not be
superseded for promotion to a higher class, category or grade
by his junior, if the vacancy in the higher class, category or
grade arises within the period specified in the Special Rules for
completion of probation in the class, category or grade in which
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
he is probationer and if he has passed the test or tests
prescribed for successful completion of probation and is
otherwise eligible and suitable for such promotion; but his
promotion shall be subject to the condition that he satisfactorily
completes the probation in the class, category or grade from
which he was promoted within the period prescribed thererefor,
and for this purpose the period of service put in by him in the
higher class, category or grade shall be reckoned towards
probation in the class, category or grade from which he was
promoted and also in the class, category or grade to which he
was promoted:
Provided further that if a probationer promoted in
pursuance of the above proviso fails to complete his probation
in the class, category or grade from which he was promoted
within the period prescribed therefor, his probation in the higher
class, category or grade shall be terminated and he shall be
reverted to the class, category or grade from which he was
promoted, and any subsequent promotion of such person to the
higher class, category or grade shall not also entitle such
person to claim seniority in the higher class, category or grade
by reason only of his previous promotion in pursuance of the
preceding proviso and he shall commence probation afresh in
that class, category or grade from the date of such subsequent
promotion.
28.(bb) Promotion which depends upon the passing of any
examination.- Promotion in a service or class which depends
upon the passing of any examination (General or Departmental)
shall ordinarily be made with reference to the conditions
existing at the time of occurrence of the vacancies and not with
reference to those at the time when the question of promotions
is taken up. "
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
13. On plain and simple reading of proviso to Rule 28(a)(i) if
read in short sentences and on drill would mean;
i) probationer in a class, category or grade shall not be
superseded for promotion to a higher class, category or grade
by his junior.
ii) if the vacancy in the higher class, category or grade arises
within the period specified in the Special Rules for completion
of probation in the class, category or grade in which he is
probationer.
iii) and if he has passed the test or tests prescribed for such
promotions.
iv) but his promotion shall be subject to the condition that he
satisfactorily completes the probation in the class, category or
grade from which he was promoted within the specified period.
v) and for this purpose the period of service put in by him in
higher class, category or grade shall be reckoned towards
probation in the class, category or grade from which he was
promoted.
vi). and also in the class, category or grade to which he was
promoted.
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
14. For sake of repetition the cumulative effect of all the
conditions of the proviso in a segregated manner provides that there
is no such condition that on failing to acquire the test, the promotion
of the persons on occurrence of vacancy would be not considered or
would lose seniority.
15. The reliance to Rules 28(bb) envisage situation where
promotion in a service or class depends upon the passing of any
examination (General or Departmental) at the time of occurrence of
vacancy and not with reference to those at the time when the
question of promotion is taken up. It would mean that the test
would be only called for if the vacancy had occurred but the
candidate should not wait when the question of promotion is taken
up.
16. Respondent No.2 in the first petition has given in
tabulated form the names of the persons, date of joining of their
services, completion of one year, acquisition of mandatory test
qualification ie., SOM, account test, date of declaration of probation
and promotion, the same reads as under:
Date of acquiring
Date of mandatory Test
completion of Qualifications
Name of the Date of joining one year on Date of
Sl.No. Officer University duty from the declaration of
service date of probation
SOM Account Test
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
joining
University
Service
1 Steena 28.02.2011 FN 27.02.2012 20.07.2011 06.07.2011 28.02.2012
Stephan AN FN
2 Shehena 16.05.2011 FN 15.05.2012 20.07.2011 10.01.2012 16.05.2012
Kunjumon A AN FN
3 Maya Devi S 08.06.2011 FN 07.06.2012 21.01.2012 10.01.2012 08.06.2012
AN FN
4 Aswathy A L 08.06.2011 FN 07.06.2012 21.01.2012 Jan 2014 08.06.2012
AN FN
5 Sajeev M V 12.10.2011 FN 13.10.2012 13.01.2011 05.01.2006 14.10.2012
AN FN
6 Leena 01.12.2011 FN NA NA NA NA
Vasudev
(IUT)
7 Anna T A 01.12.2011 FN NA NA NA NA
(IUT)
8 Ambily G 16.07.2010 AN 16.07.2011 13.01.2011 10.01.2012 17.07.2011
AN FN
9 Anupama V 21.07.2010 FN 20.07.2011 20.07.2011 10.01.2012 21.07.2011
Nair AN FN
10 Sumy Thomas 21.07.2010 FN 20.07.2011 20.07.2011 10.01.2012 21.07.2011
AN FN
11 Anitha 20.11.2010 FN 19.11.2011 20.07.2011 10.01.2012 20.11.2011
Samuel AN FN
12 Faseela K A 22.11.2010 FN 21.11.2011 21.01.2012 10.01.2012 22.01.2012
AN FN
17. All petitioners on perusal of the chart, which is not
disputed by respondents as well as private respondents, had cleared
their SOM examination prior to respondents. Respondent No.3
completed on 20.07.2011, respondent No.4 on 20.07.2011,
respondent No5. on 21.01.2012 and respondent No.6 on
13.01.2011. It is a matter of record that the vacancies had occurred
for the purpose of the petitioner No.1 on 09.09.2011, petitioner No.2
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
on 16.05.2011, Petitioner No.3 on 01.04.2011 and petitioner No.4
on 15.06.2011 and the petitioner in second writ petition on
16.04.2011 whereas for the private respondents also this vacancies
occurred on 1.04.2011 but, the reasoning assigned was that no
eligible candidate was available. From the chart extracted above, it
is evident that all respondents except respondent No.4 had cleared
their test after the occurrence of the vacancy along with petitioners.
18. As far as the clearance of account test is concerned all
petitioners had cleared test qualification on 10.1.2012, whereas
respondent Nos.4 & 5 cleared the test along with petitioners on
10.01.2012, except respondent Nos.3 & 6, who cleared the test
qualification on 06.07.2012, 5.1.2016 respectively. The chart
aforementioned placed on record by respondents thus clearly makes
out the case of discrimination placing petitioners in the seniority list
junior to respondents 3 and 4 and the reasoning assigned as noticed
above is only a figment of imagination and not in accordance with
the provisions of the Rules and also the factual facts as depicted
above.
19. Proviso to Rule 28(a)(i), rather supports the case of
petitioners as respondent Nos. 3 to 6 superseded them for the
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
purpose of promotion as the test mentioned only for the purpose of
probation and not for any promotion.
As an upshot of my findings, the impugned orders dated
26.11.2012 and 10.05.2019 are not sustainable and hereby set
aside. Respondents are directed to assign petitioners' seniority
above respondent Nos. 3 to 6 strictly in accordance with Rule 28(a)
of KS & SSR Rules, 1958 as expeditiously as possible but not later
than two months.
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL
JUDGE
nak
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16955/2019
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER VIDE
NO.AD.A1153/2010(A) DATED 13.08.2010
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER VIDE
NO.AD.A1/153/2010(A) DATED 22.11.2010
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER VIDE
NO.AD.A1/153/2010(A) DATED 30.11.2010
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER VIDE
NO.AD.A1/158/2012 DATED 25.1.2012 ISSUED
BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER VIDE
NO.AD.A1/158/2012 DATED 30.04.2012 ISSUED
BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER VIDE
NO.AD.A1/158/2012 DATED 23.07.2012 ISSUED
BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER VIDE
NO.AD.A1/153(P)/99 (VOL.V) DATED
26.12.2012 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF SUBMISSION DATED 24.12.2012
SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE
2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF SUBMISSION DATED 24.12.2012
SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE
2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF SUBMISSION DATED 29.12.2012
SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER BEFORE THE
2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF SUBMISSION DATED 29.12.2012
SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH PETITIONER BEFORE THE
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF REPLY VIDE
NO.AD.A1/153(P)/99(VOL.V) ISSUED BY THE
1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE REMINDER DATED 10.12.2018
SUBMITTED BY 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND
RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.02.2019
IN W.P(C) NO.5865/2019 OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT
EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO VIDE
NO.AD.A1/103/MISC/ESTT.2018(2) DATED
10.05.2019 ISSUED BY THE UNIVERISTY
EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION UNDER RIGHT
TO INFORMATION ACT SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND
PETITIONER ON 16.05.2019
EXHIBIT P17 TRUE COPY OF HE ANSWER
NO.AD.A2/203/RTI/2019 OBTAINED UNDER RIGHT
TO INFORMATION ACT ON 14.06.2019
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT R3(A) TRUE COPY OF NOTE NO.ADA1/153(P)/99(VOL.V)
(PF9) FURNISHED BY THE COCHIN UNIVERSITY
OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY TO THE 3RD
RESPONDENT UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION
ACT.
EXHIBIT R3(B) TRUE COPY OF ORDER U.O.NO.AD.A1/153(P)/99
(VOL.V) DATED 17.05.2012.
EXHIBIT R3(C) TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 08.01.2015 IN
W.P.C. 30151/2011 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH
COURT OF KERALA
EXHIBIT R3(d) TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.FIN.II/F904/2011
DATED 21.12.2012 ISSUED BY COCHIN
UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, KOCHI
- 682 022
EXHIBIT R3(E) TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.FIN.II/FF904/2011
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
DATED 12.2.2013 ISSUED BY COCHIN
UNIVERISTY OF SCIENCE &
EXHIBIT R2(a) TRUE COPY OF THE TABULAR SHEET SHOWING THE
DATE OF OCCURRENCE OF VACANCIES IN THE
POST OF SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT SINCE THE
PUBLISHING OF GRADATION LIST IN THE
CATEGORY OF ASSISTANT, AS ON 15.07.2011 BY
THE UNIVERSITY.
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24718/2019
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER APPOINTING THE
PETITIONER TO THE POST OF ASSISTANT.
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.08.2011
DECLARING THE PROBATION OF THE PETITIONER
WITH EFFECT FROM 21.07.2011.
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE RELEVANT OF THE SENIORITY LIT OF
ASSISTANTS.
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT SHOWING THE
DECLARATION OF PROBATION IN RESPECT OF THE
3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT SHOWING THE
DECLARATION OF PROBATION IN RESPECT OF THE
4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 26.11.2012
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT PROMOTING THE
PETIITONER AS SENIOR GRADD ASSISTANT.
EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
27.02.2019 IN WP(C)NO.5865 OF 2019.
EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
SUBMITTED BY THE PEITITONER DATED
29.04.2019.
EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO DATED 10.05.2019
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21.06.2019
IN WP(C)NO.16955 OF 2019.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT R3 A TRUE COPY OF U.O. NO. AD/A1/153(P)/99
(VOL.V) DATED 17.05.2012 ISSUED BY THE
COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY
WP(C).Nos.16955/2019(T) & 24718/2019(L)
EXHIBIT R3 B TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC
30151/2011 DATED 08.01.2015 OF THE
HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
EXHIBIT R3 C TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO. FIN II/F/904/2011
DATED 12.02.2013 ISSUED BY THE COCHIN
UNIVERISTY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
EXHIBIT R2 A TRUE COPY OF THE TABULAR SHEET SHOWING THE
DATE OF OCCURRENCE OF VACANCIES IN THE
POST OF SENIOR GRADE ASSISTANT SINCE THE
PUBLISHING OF GRADATION LIST IN THE
CATEGORY OF ASSISTANT , AS ON 15.07.2011
BY THE UNIVERSITY
