Abija V. S vs. Gireeshkumar T. M

Court:Supreme Court of India
Judge:Hon'ble Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Sanjay Kumar
Case Status:Disposed
Order Date:17 May 2024
CNR:SCIN010079472024

AI Summary

Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order

Order Issued After Hearing

Purpose:

Fixed Date by Court

Before:

Hon'ble Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Hon'ble Prasanna B. Varale

Stage:

DISPOSAL/FINAL DISPOSAL AT ADMISSION STAGE - CIVIL CASES

Remarks:

List On (Date) [13-08-2024]

Listed On:

17 May 2024

In:

Judge

Category:

UNKNOWN

Original Order Copy

Get a certified copy of this order

Download True Copy

Order Text

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 5077-5078/2024

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 30-01-2024 in WA No. 1941/2023 30-01-2024 in WA No. 1945/2023 passed by the High Court Of Kerala At Ernakulam)

ANOOP M & ORS. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

GIREESHKUMAR T.M & ORS. Respondent(s)

(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. )

WITH

SLP(C) No. 4723-4724/2024 (XI-A)

SLP(C) No. 4709-4710/2024 (XI-A)

SLP(C) No. 7538-7539/2024 (XI-A) (IA No.75117/2024-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT)

Date : 23-04-2024 These petitions were called on for hearing today.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vipin Nair, AOR Mr. Arindam Ghosh, Adv. Ms. M.b.ramya, Adv. Mr. Karthik Jayashankar, Adv. Mr. Mohd Aman Alam, Adv. Mr. P.B.sashaankh, Adv. Mr. V.Giri, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Roy Abraham, Adv.

  • Ms. Reena Roy, Adv.
  • Mr. Aditya Koshy Roy, Adv.
  • Mr. Yaduinder Lal, Adv.
  • Mr. Himinder Lal, AOR
For Respondent(s)Mr. Mohammed Sadique T.a., AOR
Mr. Kaleeswaram Raj, Adv.
Ms. Thulasi K Raj, Adv.
Ms. Aprana Menon, Adv.

1

Ms. Aparna Menon, Adv. Ms. Chinnu Mariya Antony, Adv. Ms. Devahuti Pathak, Adv. Mr. Devahuti Pathak, Adv. Mr. Shaji P Chaly, Sr. Adv. Mr. P Nandakumar, Adv. Mr. Abdulla Naseeh V.t., AOR Ms. Rachel Sara James, Adv. Ms. Abreeda Banu, Adv. Mr. Himinder Lal, AOR Mr. Vipin Nair, AOR Mr. Arindam Ghosh, Adv. Ms. M.b.ramya, Adv. Mr. Karthik Jayashankar, Adv. Mr. Mohd Aman Alam, Adv. Mr. P.B.Sashaankh, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

1. An advertisement dated 16.07.2012 by the Public Service Commission for the post of Lower Division Clerk in Kerala Water Authority specifically prescribed:

"ii). Certificate in Data Entry and office Automation of minimum 3 months (120 hrs) duration awarded by Lal Bahadur Shastri Centre for Science and Technology (LBS)/Institute of Human Resources Development (IHRD) or from similar / equivalent institution approved by the Government."

2. The issue arose as to whether persons having diploma/degree in Computer Application, instead of certificate in Data Entry would also be eligible for consideration. This issue was taken up in the first round of litigation, and a Division Bench by its order dated 13.06.2022 held that those who held diploma/degree cannot be included in the selection list.

3. Thereafter, in the probability list prepared by the Public Service Commission, candidates who had diploma/degree in Computer

2

Application were actually included and this led to the filing of a writ petition by those who had certificate in Data Entry. The Writ Petition was allowed by the Single Judge and the Writ Appeal was dismissed by the Division Bench.

4. Justice is a synthesis of need for order and quest for justice**. Pursuing the** need for order**, the Division Bench has followed its earlier judgment dated 13.06.2022 to hold that the issue is already covered by it in the said judgment. On the other hand, Mr. V. Giri, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, submits that the notification specifying certificate in Data Entry cannot be read as to exclude diploma/degree holders and if it is so read, it will cause great injustice.**

5. We are of the opinion that there is uncertainty in the notification, particularly when we read it in the context of Rule 10(a)(ii) of Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules, 1958. We have not expressed any final opinion on the matter but in order to do justice, we are of the opinion that in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, where the Public Service Commission is seeking to make appointments on the basis of 2012 advertisement, we suggest as follows. The total number of posts can perhaps be bifurcated into distinct quotas, for example, if there are 140 posts, 70 posts can be allocated to certificate holders and remaining to the diploma/degree holders. This bifurcation is only an illustration, and we will leave it to the Public Service Commission to apply its mind and put an end to this litigation which had commenced in 2012 and is still continuing.

3

6. We have, therefore, requested Mr. Vipin Nair to take instructions and inform us of the decision to be taken by the Public Service Commission.

7. List these matters on 30.04.2024.

(KAPIL TANDON) (NIDHI WASON)

COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)

Share This Order

Case History of Orders

Order(9) - 4 Nov 2024

Judgement - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(10) - 4 Nov 2024

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(8) - 27 Sept 2024

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(7) - 5 Aug 2024

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(6) - 17 May 2024

ROP - of Main Case

Viewing

Order(5) - 23 Apr 2024

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(4) - 19 Apr 2024

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(3) - 5 Apr 2024

ROP

Click to view

Order(2) - 1 Mar 2024

ROP

Click to view

Order(1) - 23 Feb 2024

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view
Similar Case Search

Same Parties

Search in District Courts Data