Kerala State Road Transport ... vs Kerala State Road Transport ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 281 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                             PRESENT

           THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

                                 &

               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI

   WEDNESDAY, THE 06TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 16TH POUSHA, 1942

                         WA.No.26 OF 2021

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 9005/2020(A) OF HIGH COURT OF
                     KERALA DATED 19.06.2020


APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3:

      1      KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
             REP.BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSRTC,
             TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 023

      2      THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION)
             KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
             FORT P.O., TRANSPORT BHAVAN,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 023

      3      THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER
             KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
             NEDUMANGAD P.O., PIN 695 541,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

             BY ADV. SRI.T.P.SAJAN


RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & 4TH RESPONDENT:

      1      R.VIJAYAN
             SON OF RAMAKRISHNAN, SAROJA KRISHNA,
             MUTHIYANKAVU, MANNOORKONAM P.O., NEDUMANGAD,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT 695 584

      2      STATE OF KERALA
             REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT,
             SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001

             SRI.T.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR, GOVT. PLEADER

     THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.01.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WA.No.26 OF 2021

                                     2




             ALEXANDER THOMAS & T.R. RAVI, JJ.
              ===========================
                      W. A. No. 26 of 2021
                                   in
                  W. P. (C). No. 9005 of 2020
              ===========================
               Dated this the 6th day of January, 2021

                              JUDGMENT

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

The instant appeal has been filed to impugn the judgment dated

19.06.2020 rendered by a learned Single Judge of this Court in WP(C)

No.9005 of 2020 filed by the 1st respondent herein. Vide G.O. (MS)

No.78/2011 dated 22.12.2011, the appellants-Kerala State Road Transport

Corporation ('KSRTC' for short) was directed by the State Government to

regularize the service of provisional employees on the Rolls of the said

Corporation, who have completed 10 years of service as on 22.12.2011.

Though the writ petitioner's name was originally included in the said list of

provisional employees eligible for such regularization, his service was not

so regularised, on the ground that he does not possess the requisite

qualification of Secondary School Leaving Certificate (SSLC). On being

aggrieved thereby, the writ petitioner was constrained to approach this WA.No.26 OF 2021

Court by instituting a writ proceeding as WP(C) No.18044/2013, in which

this Court has rendered Ext.P1 judgment on 30.05.2014, holding that the

petitioner cannot be deemed regularisation on the ground that he lacks the

qualification prescribed to hold the post of 'Reserve Conductor'.

Accordingly, this Court issued directions as per Ext.P1 judgment, ordering

that the KSRTC shall issue necessary orders regularising the service of the

petitioner, if he fulfills all other eligible criteria, without any further delay.

Thereafter, the appellant-KSRTC has complied with the directions issued in

Ext.P1 judgment by issuing Exts.P2 and P3 orders dated 09.12.2014 &

27.12.2014 respectively, directing the regularization of the service of the

petitioner on the Rolls of the KSRTC, as otherwise he has possessed all

other eligible qualifications. It is also ordered in Ext.P2 that the

petitioner's service will stand regularised with effect from 22.12.2011 [the

date of issuance of the above said G.O. ordering regularization]. It appears

that after rendering of Ext.P1 judgment by this Court on 30.05.2014, the

State Government had issued Annexure A1 letter dated 19.07.2014 ordering

that in the case of provisional employees, who do not have the minimum

qualification, then their service can be regularised only after they acquiring

all the said qualifications. It is pursuant to Annexure 1, directions issued by WA.No.26 OF 2021

the State Government on 19.07.2014 that the appellant-KSRTC has

thereafter issued Ext.P8 order dated 15.05.2019 directing that the service of

the writ petitioner can be regularised only with effect from 29.10.2014,

which is the date on which he had subsequently acquired the qualification

of S.S.L.C. Being aggrieved by the said impugned order in Ext.P8, whereby

his date of regularization is revised from 22.12.2011 [date of issuance of the

regularization G.O.] to 29.10.2014 [date of acquisition of the qualification]

and the consequential steps taken for recovery etc., he had approached this

Court by filing the instant WP(C) No.9005/2020. The learned Single

Judge as per the impugned judgment rendered on 19.06.2020, has allowed

the pleas of the petitioner in the abovesaid WP(C) No.9005/2020 by

holding that after the authorities concerned have already suffered a

judgment as per Ext.P1 directing that the petitioner is legally entitled for

regularization on the basis of the said G.O. dated 22.12.2011 even though

he lacks the qualification of S.S.L.C., it is not open to the authorities

concerned to reopen the said issue and to revise the date of regularization,

more so particularly since Ext.P1 judgment has become final and

conclusive. It is this judgment of the learned Single Judge in WP(C)

No.9004/2020, that is under challenge in this intra-court appeal. WA.No.26 OF 2021

2. One of the main contentions of Sri.T.P.Sajan, learned standing

counsel for the KSRTC, appearing for the appellant authorities is that the

State Government is empowered to issue directions in the nature of

Annexure A1 dated 19.07.2014 to the KSRTC by virtue of the powers

conferred under Section 34 of the Road Transport Corporation Act, which

is an Act framed by the Parliament and that therefore no interference is

called for in the impugned order in Ext.P1 and the learned Single Judge is

went wrong in rendering the impugned judgment.

3. After hearing both sides, it is to be noted that both the KSRTC

as well as the State Government were parties in Ext.P1 judgment and they

have suffered the said adverse judgment as per Ext.P1, wherein it was held

that the writ petitioner is entitled for regularization based on the said G.O.

dated 22.12.2011, even though he does not hold the requisite qualification

of S.S.L.C. provided he has all the other requisite qualifications. That after

having suffered the said judgment-Ext.P1, the same has become final and

conclusive, it is not open to the KSRTC as well as the State Government,

who were parties thereto, to take the present stand and that they are thus

barred by res judicata for raising such a plea.

4. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that the impugned WA.No.26 OF 2021

judgment cannot be faulted, as being illegal or unreasonable in any manner

and would not deserve appellate interdiction at the hands of this Court,

more so particularly, in this intra-court appeal.

The Writ Appeal fails and the same is dismissed.

Sd/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE

Sd/-

T.R.RAVI, JUDGE

Pn WA.No.26 OF 2021

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT LETTER AS PER COMMUNICATION VIDE REF NO.4646/A3/2013 DATED 19.7.2014