Kerala High Court
Kerala Public Service Commission vs Shanil.N. B on 4 June, 2025
WA NOS.956 & 957 OF 2020
1
2025:KER:38629
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SYAM KUMAR V.M.
TH
WEDNESDAY, THE 4
DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 14TH JYAISHTA,
1947
WA NO. 956 OF 2020
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22.06.2020 IN WP(C) NO.34618
OF 2019 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:
ERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
K
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.S.C. OFFICE, PATTOM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004.
BY ADV SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN
RESPONDENTS:
1
HANIL.N.B
S
NEYYATH HOUSE, POIKKATTUSSERY, CHENGAMANAD P.O.,
ALUVA, ERNAKULAM-683 578.
2
ERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
K
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,
TRANSPORT BAHVAN, EAST FORT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023.
3
HAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,
C
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT
BAHVAN, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023.
WA NOS.956 & 957 OF 2020
2
2025:KER:38629
Y ADVS.
B
DR.K.P.SATHEESAN (SR.)
SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM)
SRI.K.SUDHINKUMAR
SRI.S.K.ADHITHYAN
SRI.SABU PULLAN
HIS
T WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON
28.05.2025
ALONG
WITH
WA.957/2020,
THE
COURT
ON
04.06.2025
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NOS.956 & 957 OF 2020
3
2025:KER:38629
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SYAM KUMAR V.M.
TH
WEDNESDAY, THE 4
DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 14TH JYAISHTA,
1947
WA NO. 957 OF 2020
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22.06.2020 IN WP(C) NO.34319
OF 2019 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT:
HE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
T
P.S.C.OFFICE, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004
BY ADV SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN
RESPONDENTS:
1
IDHEESH KUMAR
N
AGED 44 YEARS,
CHALIKKARA HOUSE, KAYAPPILLY,
OLAVANNA P.O., KOZHIKODE
2
ERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
K
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 025
3
HE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
T
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023
WA NOS.956 & 957 OF 2020
4
2025:KER:38629
BY ADV SRI.ANIL KUMAR M.SIVARAMAN
HIS
T WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON
28.05.2025
ALONG
WITH
WA.956/2020,
THE
COURT
ON
04.06.2025
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NOS.956 & 957 OF 2020
5
2025:KER:38629
JUDGMENT
[WA Nos.956/2020, 957/2020]
Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, J.
Regardbeinghadtothesimilaritywiththeorderspassedby
the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) Nos. 34618 and 34319 of
2019, both these appeals were heard analogously and are being
disposed of by a common judgment.
2. The present writ appeals assail the order dated
22.06.2020 passed in the aforesaid two writ petitions, whereby
certain interim directionswereissuedtotheappellanthereinand
which are now under challenge, while the writ petitions are still
pending.Thepartyrespondentshereinhadfiledthewritpetitions
with the following prayers:
"W.P(C)No.34618 of 2019
i) to issueaWritofMandamusororderordirectionto
r espondents 1 and 2 not to engage any personasdriversin
K.S.R.T.C. either ondailywagebasisorotherwiseexceptthe
persons advised by P.S.C.
ii)toissueaWritofMandamusororderordirectionto
the2ndrespondenttomakearequesttothe3rdrespondent
for advising 2455 candidates for appointment asempanelled
drivers in K.S.R.T.C.
iii) to declare that the petitioner is entitled to be
appointed as reserve driver in K.S.R.T.C. as his name is
WA NOS.956 & 957 OF 2020
6
2025:KER:38629
included in the ranked list published by P.S.C.
iv) to issue such other appropriate Writ, Order or
direction as is deemed just and necessary in the
circumstances of the case.
W.P(C)No.34319 of 2019
i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate
rit, direction or order directing the Public Service
w
Commission to advice the enlisted candidates from the rank
list published on 23/8/2012 to fill 2455 vacancies of drivers
reported by the Corporation on 6/8/2015.
ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate
writ, order or direction, directing the K.S.R.T.C. to intimate
the Public Service Commissiontoadvicethecandidatesfrom
the rank list published on 23/8/2012 to fill the reported
vacancy of 2455 and appoint them in the post of drivers.
iii) Grant such other appropriate writ, direction ororder
as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts
and circumstances of the case."
3. The learned Single Judge passed the impugned interim
order by issuing the following directions to the appellant herein:
"The immediate grievance of the petitioners is that,
t hough a DivisionBenchofthisCourtasperjudgmentdated
08.04.2019 in W.A. No.1011/2019 and connected cases
directed the services of the empanelled drivers who were
overstaying beyond180daysinviolationofRule9(2)ofPart
II of KS&SSR to be terminated, they are being re-employed
by the Corporation.
2. The learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation
submits that, engagement of drivers on daily wages is
frequently necessitated due to leave vacancies which impels
theCorporationtoengagedriversondailywages.Heasserts
that the services of the empanelled drivers were terminated
and that they are not being re-engaged.
3. Be that as it may, what is the interim arrangement
to be made pending the disposal of the writ petitions needs to
be dealt with.
WA NOS.956 & 957 OF 2020
7
2025:KER:38629
4. The learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation
ubmits that the Corporation is in penury and is unable to
s
meetitsexpenditure;inthepresentscenariotheCorporation
does not want to burden itself with any further financial
liability either by making regular appointments or
appointments under Rule 9(a) (i)ofPartIIofKS&SSR.They
will engage drivers on daily wages in terms of Rule 9A of
KS&SSR,itissubmitted.Thepetitionersarealsoamenableto
adoption of such a course pending final disposal of the writ
petitions.
5. As per order dated 30.06.2015 in W.P. (C)No.
2460/2015, the Corporation had reported 2455 vacancies of
reserved drivers to the Public Service Commission. It was
further directed that the PSCneednotadvisethecandidates
without getting orders from the court. There has been no
further directions.Thepetitionersareenlistedintheranklist
which came into force on 23.08.2012 and expired on
31.12.2016. As noticed, pursuant to the directions by this
Court 2455 vacancies were reported during the currency of
thesaidranklist.SinceasofnowtheCorporationhaschosen
not to effect regular appointments and that the enlisted
candidates like the petitioners are waiting in the queue
awaiting appointment, I consider itonlyjustandproperthat
daily wages appointments in terms of Rule9Aasreferredto
intheprecedingparagraph,asisproposedtobedonebythe
Corporation, be made from the 2455 candidates enlisted in
theaforementionedranklist.Idonoticethatasimilarcourse
was adopted earlier also by this Court in O.P. 37878/2001.
Neither side have any objection to the above.
6. Accordingly, the following directions are issued:-
(i) The Public Service Commission shall forward the
detailsofthe2455personsfromtheranklistwhichcameinto
forceon23.08.2012andexpiredon31.12.2016.Thelistshall
be prepared as if it is prepared as an advice list applying
communal rotation and seniority.
(ii) The list as directed in clause (1) above shall be
forwarded to the Corporation within a period of two weeks
from today.
(iii)TheCorporationshallcallupontheenlistedpersons
to exercise their option regarding thestations/unitstowhich
they would like tobeattached.Suchcommunicationshallbe
effected by the Corporation by registered post.
(iv) On the basis of options soprovided,theyshallbe
employed by the Corporation strictly adhering to Rule 9A of
WA NOS.956 & 957 OF 2020
8
2025:KER:38629
Part II of the KS&SSR.
(v) Appointments as above shall not confer the
appointees any special rights or privileges, nor shall the
failure to take up such appointments affect the rights of
candidates in the PSC's rank list for their regular
appointments, if they are otherwise entitled."
4. Thelearnedcounselfortheappellantcontendedthatthe
interim order underchallenge waspassed by thelearnedSingle
Judgewithoutconsideringthefactthatsuchdirections,effectively
directing appointments at the interim stage, amount to granting
final relief. As such, the writ appeals are also maintainable
against the interim order, which is in thenature of afinal order.
The learned counsel further submitted that such interim orders
could create third-party rights,andin theeventthe pendingwrit
petitions are dismissed, it would give rise to the litigationwhich
could have been avoided.
5. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the
respondents vehemently opposedtheprayer andsubmittedthat
the interim order under challenge was passed on 22.06.2020.
However, the appellant has not complied with the same.
Therefore, there is no need tointerfere withthe saidorder. The
WA NOS.956 & 957 OF 2020
9
2025:KER:38629
learnedcounselfurthersubmittedthatthewritappealsdeserveto
be dismissed with heavy costs.
6. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant
and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
7. On a perusal of the original prayers made in the writ
petition, itisevident thatthe partyrespondentsneverprayedfor
such an interim relief. The only interim relief sought was for a
direction to be issued to the appellant herein, restraining them
fromengaginganypersonotherthanthoseadvisedbytheKerala
Public Service Commissionas Drivers in theKeralaState Road
Transport Corporation, pending disposal of the writ petition.
Admittedly, the directions issued vide the impugnedorder could
nothavebeenissuedbywayofaninterimdirection,inasmuchas
the same amountsto grantingfinalreliefandcreatingthird-party
rights. The learned Single Judge erred in issuing the interim
directions.
8. In view of the afore, this Court is of the considered
WA NOS.956 & 957 OF 2020
10
2025:KER:38629
opinion that, looking to the fact thatthe interim orderimpugned
has not been complied with and that suchdirectionscouldnot
havebeenissuedattheinterimstage,theimpugnedorderdated
22.06.2020 is liable to be quashed and is accordingly quashed.
Accordingly thewrit appealsstandallowed. No orderas to
costs.
However,havingregardtothependencyofthewritpetitions
since the year2019, we areoftheconsideredviewthatitwould
beappropriate torequestthelearnedSingleJudgetodisposeof
the writ petitions expeditiously.
Sd/-
SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
JUDGE
Sd/-
SYAM KUMAR V.M.
JUDGE
MC/29.5
