LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
⚖️ Ask the AI about your situation:🚗 Car Accident💼 Work / Job🏠 Housing / Eviction👪 Family / Divorce📋 Contract Dispute💰 Money Owed

NAIR SERVICE SOCIETY versus DISTT. OFFICER, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND ORS.

Citation: [2003] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 551 · Decided: 17-11-2003 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V.N. KHARE · Disposal: Disposed off

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

NAIR SERVICE SOCIETY 
v. 
DISTT. OFFICER, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION 
AND ORS. 
NOVEMBER I7, 2003 
[V.N. KHARE CJ., S.B. SINHA AND DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN, JJ.] 
Service Law: 
A 
B 
Kera/a State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1958-Rules 15 to 17- C 
Constitution of India, 1950-Article 16(4)-Appointment of Sub-Engineers 
in State Electricity Board-Rules providing reservation including carry 
forward of vacancy not exceeding 50% and that every alternate appointment 
is for open competition (merit) and every succeeding alternate appointment 
for reserved candidates-State Public Service Commission preparing rank D 
list and also separate supplementary list recommending 239 names, 177 
from main rank list and 62 from supplementary list-For getting reserved 
candidates, candidates I to 18 recommended from supplementary list of 
Muslims-Others not advised since main list got exhausted-20 candidates 
comprising of I I from open competition, 3 SCs, 3 OBC and 3 Muslims not 
joining duty-19th candidate in Muslim supplementary list claiming E 
appointment to one of the vacancies of Muslims, along with similar other 
writ petitioners-High Court directing Commission to advise candidu.ie 
from supplementary list-In writ appeals Division Bench holding that once 
main list got exhausted supplementary list also automatically gets 
extinguished-However, High Court directed appointment from F 
supplementary list-Correctness of-Held: Candidates not entitled to 
appointment based on supplementary list since that would exceed percentage 
of reservation beyond 50% against statutory protection violating 50:50 
rule-However, appointments made pursuant to order of High Court not to 
be disturbed 
State Public Service Commission selects candidate for appointment in 
Government service for which Rules of Reservation laid down in Kerala State 
and Subordinate Service Rules, 1959 have to be followed. Rules IS to 17 
provide for 50% reservation in the aggregate for SC, ST 11nd OBCs; and 
551 
G 
H 
552 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2003] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 
A that every alternate appointment is for open competition (merit) and succeeding 
alternate appointment for reserved candidate. 
State Electricity Board sought preparation of a select list for 
appointment of Sub Engineers. State Public Service Commission prepared a 
rank list of 177 and also prepared separate supplementary lists. Commission 
B advised in all 239 names, drawing 177 names from the main rank list and 62 
names from the supplementary list. For reservation candidates Commission 
advised names of candidate nos.I to 18 from among the supplementary list 
for Muslims. Commission could not advise further names from supplementary 
list as the main rank list got exhausted. Out of 89 candidates advised, 20 
C candidates comprising of eleven from open competition, three SC's, three 
OBCs and three Muslims did not join duty. These non-joining duty (NJD) 
vacancies were reported to the Commission but no advice was made. 
Thereafter, candidate No.19 in the Muslim supplementary list filed a writ 
petition claiming appointment to one of these NJD vacancies of Muslims being 
the next candidate in the Muslim supplementary list. Commission contended 
D before the High Court that as the main rank list stood exhausted by advising 
the last of the candidates included therein. the supplementary list of 
reservation candidates also ceased to be in force as otherwise rule of 50:50 
would stand violated. Single Judge of High Court allowed the petition and 
directed the Commission to advise names of candidates to NJD vacancies. 
E Commission then filed writ appeals. Division Bench of the High Court 
dismissed the appeals and directed that the petitioners in the original petition 
would be entitled to appointment based on the supplementary list despite its 
holding that once the main list got extinguished the supplementary list also 
automatically gets extinguished. Thereafter, the Commission implemented the 
decision of High Court and did not file any appeal against the order; therefore, 
F the present appellant-Society has filed instant appeals in public interest. 
Appellant contended that by the impugned judgment the backward turns 
alone are to be filled in whereas Rule 14 lays down that the open category 
turn is to be filled in first and then the backward turns; that the procedures 
indicates that in order to workout the rotation open competition candidates 
G would also be available; that Rule 15 provides tha

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