Kerala High Court
Anoop.K vs State Of Kerala on 24 March, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 3RD CHAITHRA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 21988 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
ANOOP.K
AGED 30 YEARS
S/O. KRISHNANKUTTY,
KUMARAPPILLY HOUSE,
KADUKUTTY VILLAGE,
CHALAKKUDY TALUK,
ANNANADU P.O.,
THRISSUR DISTRICT-680324.
BY ADVS.
C.DHEERAJ RAJAN
ANAND KALYANAKRISHNAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 MANAGING DIRECTOR,
KERALA STATE BAMBOO CORPORATION LTD.,
POST BOX NO.20,
ANGAMALY SOUTH P.O., PIN-683573.
BY ADVS.
LATHA ANAND FOR R2
ANIMA M., GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 24.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No.21988 of 2021
:2 :
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 24th day of March, 2023
The petitioner, who is a resident of Kadukutty
Village in Thrissur District, is aggrieved by the refusal of the
respondents to appoint him as Plant Worker.
2. The petitioner states that the 2nd respondent invited
applications for appointment to the post of Plant Worker. The
petitioner submitted application. In the written test and
interview, the petitioner scored 43.2 marks out of 100. The
total number of vacancies of Plant Worker was 17. The
petitioner has not been appointed so far. At the same time,
the candidates named Akhil Gokuldas, Jeo Jacob and Sethu
Velayudhan, who have scored less than 43.2 marks, have
already been appointed.
3. The petitioner would contend that in view of the
extant Government Order, the respondents were duty bound
to give reservation to Economically Weaker Section. Such
WP(C) No.21988 of 2021
reservation has not been provided in Ext.P1 notification. The
petitioner is eligible for appointment against that quota also.
4. Standing Counsel entered appearance and resisted
the writ petition. On behalf of the respondents, it is submitted
that so far only 12 candidates have been appointed. There is
a provision in Ext.P1 notification to give priority to children of
Traditional Reed, Bamboo Workers and Mat Weavers. Afore
three persons named by the petitioner have been appointed
on the basis of the priority provided to them.
5. The counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand,
urged that a minimum of 40% cut off mark in the examination
is prescribed as per Ext.P8, for appointment. Two out of the
afore said three candidates did not score 40 marks. There is
no provision for relaxation in the marks as per Ext.P1 or under
any other order.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,
the learned Government Pleader representing the
1st respondent and the learned Standing Counsel appearing
for the 2nd respondent.
WP(C) No.21988 of 2021
7. Ext.P1 is the notification for recruitment to the post
of Plant Worker. The petitioner submitted application in
response to the said notification. The petitioner scored 43.2
marks out of 100.
8. It is seen from the pleadings that three candidates
who have scored less than 43.2 marks have already been
appointed.
9. The Standing Counsel would submit that the said
appointment is in view of the priority provided for the children
of Traditional Reed / Bamboo Workers and Mat Weavers.
However, it is to be noted that as per Ext.P8 Government
Order governing recruitment of man power in public sector
undertakings, it is provided that final rank list should have a
cut off mark of 40% and those who have secured an over all
mark less than 40 shall not be qualified for recruitment in
Public Service Commission. Therefore, the action of the
respondents in overlooking the petitioner who has scored 43.2
marks and giving appointment to persons who have scored
lesser marks can only be treated as arbitrary and illegal.
WP(C) No.21988 of 2021
In the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of
directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner also as
Plant Worker. Orders in this regard shall be passed within a
period of one month.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH
JUDGE
sss
WP(C) No.21988 of 2021
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21988/2021
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE
POST OF PLANT WORKER AMONGST OTHER.
EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CALL LETTER DATED
16.02.2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
TO THE EMAIL OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE EWS CERTIFICATE
DATED 10.03.2021 ISSUED BY THE
KADUKUTTY VILLAGE OFFICER IN FAVOUR OF
THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
29.06.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER OF
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE G.O. DATED
04.03.2020.
EXHIBIT P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE QUERY DATED
24.11.2021
EXHIBIT P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED
10.02.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE GO(RT) NO.
773/2013/ID DATED 17.06.2013
EXHIBIT P9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED
04.01.2010 EVIDENCING THE FACT THAT THE
PETITIONER HAD PASSED ITI.
EXHIBIT P10 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL PREFERRED
BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE APPELLATE
AUTHORITY OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P11 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED
16.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P12 THE CHART PERTAINING TO THE MARKS
OBTAINED BY THE APPOINTED PERSONS ALONG
WITH THE MARKS OBTAINED BY THE
PETITIONER.
WP(C) No.21988 of 2021
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT R2 A TRUE COPY OF GOVERNMENT ORDER NO-G.O.
(RT) 219/2021/ID DATED 16.02.2021.
EXHIBIT R2 B TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY
NO.KSBC/RTI/2021-22/780 DATED
03.11.2021
EXHIBIT R2 C TRUE COPY OF GOVERNMENT ORDER GO.O.(RT)
NO.773/2013/ID DATED 17.06.2013
