R SUSEELA DEVI Vs. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was appointed as Assistant Grade-II in the General Secretariat Service with the Public Service Commission by an advice dated 29-6-71. The Public Service Commission thereafter issued two further advice lists dated 4-7-71 and 14-7-71. Pursuant to these advice lists, respondents 2 to 9 were also appointed as Assistants Grade-II. The dates of actual joining of various persons shown in these advice lists varied depending upon exigencies of the situation. However, in the seniority list of Assistants Grade-II, admittedly, the appellant was senior to respondents 2 to 9.

(2.) The next promotional post for Assistant Grade-II is Assistant Grade-I. The promotion is purely by seniority subject to fitness. To qualify for promotion, Assistants Grade-II are required to have completed satisfactorily their two years' period of probation. On 3-7-73 a number of posts of Assistants Grade I were vacant. Since none of the Assistants Grade II were qualified on that date for promotion because they had not then completed their probation period, they were given provisional promotions by an order of that date. The appellant as well as respondents 2 to 9 were thus provisionally promoted as Assistants Grade-I by the order of 3-7-73. In this list also the appellant is shown senior to respondents 2 to 9. On 29-12-73, the respondent-Kerala Public Service Commission, issued an order giving regular promotion to 45 Assistants Grade II as Assistants Grade I. In the order of 29-12-73 respondent 2 to 9 are given the date of promotion which is prior to the date of promotion given to the appellant, thus making the appellant junior to respondents 2 to 9. The respondents contend that this was done because although the appellant was senior to respondents 2 to 9 in the cadre of Assistants Grade II, her actual date of joining that cadre was later than the actual date of joining of respondents 2 to 9. As a result, respondents 2 to 9 completed their period of probation earlier than the appellant and hence they became eligible for promotion earlier than the appellant. That is why the appellant is shown as junior to respondents 2 to 9 in the cadre of Assistants Grade I. This contention of the respondents has been upheld by the High Court relying upon a full bench decision of that Court in the case of Verghese v. State of Kerala, 1981 Ker LT 458.

(3.) The promotion in the present case was dependant entirely upon the seniority of the person concerned in the cadre of Assistant Grade II. The seniority in the cadre of Assistants Grade II was dependant upon the date of advice received from the Public Service Commission, since candidates were directly recruited as Assistants Grade II. This seniority did not depend upon the date of completion of probation of the direct recruits so appointed. This is because the date of completion of probation will depend upon other fortuitous circumstances. The date of joining may also depend upon various fortuitous circumstances. Seniority does not depend upon these fortuitous circumstances.