K.P. SUDHAKARAN AND ANR. versus STATE OF KERALA AND ORS.

Citation: [2006] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 291 · Decided: 11-05-2006 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B.N. SRIKRISHNA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

K.P. SUDHAKARAN AND ANR. 
v. 
STATE OF KERALA AND ORS. 
MAY II, 2006 
[B.N. SRIKRISHNA AND R.V. RA VEENDRAN, JJ.) 
Service Law 
Kera/a State and Subordinate Service Rules. 1958-Seniority-Recruits 
in one district transferred to same post in another district on their own 
request, and taking rank below junior-most local employee in that post in 
that district-However, in a State-wise seniority list for promotions to next 
post, seniority of transferred employee shown with reference to their first 
appointment and not with reference to dates of their joining in district to 
which they were transferred-High Court holding that in view of proviso to 
Rule 27 seniority of transferred employee was to be reckoned from date of 
their joining at the district to which they were transferred, but fi1rther 
directing that above proviso to be applied prospectively and promotions 
made with reference to seniority list were not be disturbed-Validity of-
Held-Proviso to Rule 27(a) providing that seniority of employee getting 
transferred at his own request was to be determined with reference to date 
of his joining duty in new department, applied and it was exception to general 
rule that seniority was to be determined by date of his first appointment-
Effect of Rule 27(c) was only to clarify the date with reference to which 
seniority should be reckoned when initial appointment was on advice of PSC, 
and it had no affect on operation of proviso to Rule 27(a)-High Court had 
no power to direct that a Rule which has been in force for several years, 
will be operated only prospectively, that too in a proceeding where the 
validity of the Rule was not in challenge-,Though matter had been 
continuously under litigation for long, delay in disposal cannot defeat the 
rights of employees-Section 3, Kera/a Public Services Act, 1968-Artic/e 
309, Constitution of India, 1950. 
Administrative /aw-Statutory rules governing the field-Prior executive 
instructions cease to apply in such a case. 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
Interpretation of statutes-Exceptions from statuto1y rule-Held-
Jntention behind a provision cannot be used to defeat expre~s words of H 
291 
A 
B 
292 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2006] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 
pruvisiun--Once a srarutury rule is made, withuur providing any exceplions, 
it is not possible to carve out exceptions to such rule, by judicial 
inrerprerariun- -Nor can an exemplion from application of a clear and 
specific rule be claimed un the ground uf hardship or similar reasons. 
Administration of justice- Matter continuously under litigation for 
lung. -Held-Delay in disposal cannot defeat the rights of parties. 
The appellants and respondents were recruited as Lower Division 
Clerks (LDCs) in the Registration Department of State. The former were 
recruited in district X and the latter, though recruited in other different 
C districts, were transferred, on their own request to district X. On their 
transfer, they took the rank below the junior-most local LDCs in that 
district. However, in a State-wise seniority list drawn up for the purpose 
of promotions to post of Upper Division Clerks (UDC), the seniority of 
the transferred LDCs were shown with reference to the dates of their first 
D 
appointment as LDCs and not with reference to the dates of their joining 
in the district to which they were transferred having regard to the fact 
that they were recruited prior to the local LDCs. On consideration of 
objections regarding same, a revised seniority list of LDCs was issued 
wherein the positions of transferred LDCs were shown with reference to 
the date of their joining the new district, by excluding the service rendered 
E 
till then in their old district. The transferred LDCs challenged this before 
High Court wherein it was held, having regard to G.O. dated 2.1.1961 
and Rule 27 of Kerala State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1958, that 
the seniority of the transferred LDCs will have to be reckoned only from 
the date of their join mg at the district to which they were transferred on 
F 
their own request. However, it was directed that the position of the 
transferred LDCs should not be disturbed and above G.O. and proviso 
to Rule 27(a) of the Rules were to be applied prospectively, and that the 
promotions made with reference to the seniority list should not be 
disturbed. Hence the present appeal. 
G 
Appellants contended that the High Court having accepted the legal 
position as per relevant rules and Government Orders (GO

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.