- (1.) THESE appeals are directed against the orders dated 27th November, 2002 in WA No. 2830/2002 and 7th November, 2002 in WANo. 2646/02 and 2690/2002 passed by the Division bench of the Kerala High Court whereby the division Bench has upheld the order passed by the learned Single Judge and dismissed the Writ Applications. The writ appeal was filed by the appellant as well as State of Kerala. Hence, the present appeals.
(2.) FOR the convenient disposal of these appeals, facts given in the case of R. S. Jayakumar are taken into consideration. The promotion as a Ranger in the Kerala Forest subordinate Service from among Departmental candidates i. e. Deputy Rangers and foresters was provided by. the Kerala Forest subordinate Service Rules (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) framed under proviso to Article 309 of the constitution of India. Rule 2 prescribes the mode of appointment of Rangers which is partly by Direct recruitment (25%), partly by appointment of Forest Apprentices (25%), partly by promotion of Deputy Rangers/foresters (25%) who had undergone foresters Training. We are concerned with the third category i. e. the appointment of Rangers by way of promotion of Deputy Rangers/foresters. The rangers Training has to be undergone in the forest Colleges at Coimbatore or Dehradun for which the departmental candidates have to be selected by the Kerala Public service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the KPSC ). Such selection is made in accordance with rule 10 of the Rules, namely (a) that the qualification prescribed by the Government of india for admission to the Rangers' Course , (b)that the candidate should have passed the qualifying examination of the KPSC. By notification dated 30th May, 2005; the KPSC invited applications for selection to the Forest rangers'course 2001-2003. The last date for receipt of application was 26th July, 2007. The number of vacancies were notified as 5 (provisionally) subject to change according to the allotment of seats by the government of India. The petitioners/appellants (herein) applied for the course along with other candidates who were on probation and were not approved probationers/full members of the service. A certificate was given by the Controlling Authority in favour of the candidates that they were approved probationers (though they were not ). The select list of 34 candidates prepared by the KPSC included ineligible candidates who were probationers and not approved probations or full members of service. As a result, the appellants who were approved probationers could not be selected for the vacancies notified for the course 2001 -2003 and other persons who were probationers were selected. Therefore, this action was challenged by filing a separate writ petition by the appellants and others. A counter affidavit was filed in the main writ petition No. 33355/ 2000 by the State and State accepted the contention of the appellants herein and stated that the selection and inclusion of the contesting respondents in the select list was not legal or justified. The KPSC also attempted to justify its list stating that the inclusion of these candidates were on the basis of the certificate issued by the Controlling Authority. Learned Single Judge after hearing both the parties dismissed the writ petition and held that it is only for the purpose of sending the selected candidates for training and not for promotion or appointment. The Division Bench affirmed the order of the learned Single Judge. Hence the present appeals.
(3.) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. Only limited question which is called for our consideration is whether the respondents, the selected candidates were approved probationers or full members in respective categories or not? Before we proceed to decide the question, it would be relevant to refer to necessary provisions of the Kerala Rules bearing on the subject.;