THE SECRETARY, ANAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH v. OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS

OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. SUMA S. NEELIMA NILAYAM, KAREEKUZHI, PANAVUR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 568. BY ADVS. SRI.ABIN SHEEREJ NARAYAN SRI.P.THOMAS GEEVERGHESE SRI.TONY THOMAS INCHIPARAMBIL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.1966/2015 2 P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J. -------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.1966 of 2015 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of January, 2024 JUDGMENT Petitioner is the Secretary of Anad Grama Panchayat, Thiruvananthapuram. The petitioner Panchayat invited applications for appointment to the post of 'Prerak' in Saksharatha Kendram sanctioned by the Kerala State Literacy Mission Authority. In the selection, the 2nd respondent and others participated and an interview was conducted. Four persons attended the interview and the 2nd respondent obtained 1st rank in the selection is the submission. It is submitted that, as some clarification was required, the interview was postponed and thereafter finalized on

24.12.2013. According to the petitioner, in the list provided from the Saksharatha Mission in the assessment sheet, the persons who are residing in the respective wards are entitled to get 10 marks more and therefore, the interview and selection process were completed without ascertaining where WP(C).No.1966/2015 3 the centre is to be established and therefore, as per Ext.P1 decision, the Panchayat cancelled the selection and interview. The Panchayat decided to establish the centre in Mannoorkonam Ward and also give preference to the residence of the Panchayat. Fresh applications were invited by the Panchayat on 09.10.2014, as evident by Ext.P2. As per Ext.P3, the cancellation of interview and selection was intimated to the 2nd respondent and other applicants who were interviewed earlier. In terms of Ext.P2 notification, the 2nd respondent submitted an application, as evident by Ext.P4. After submitting the application, the 2nd respondent filed a complaint before the 1st respondent Ombudsman, stating that she is the 1st rank holder in the earlier selection and the Panchayat may be restrained from making selections to the post. Ext.P5 is the complaint. Originally the preparation of rank list was stayed by the 1st respondent. The petitioner Panchayat filed an objection before the 1st respondent, as evident by Ext.P6. But, the grievance of the petitioner is that, the 1st respondent, without considering the various aspects and without noticing the fact that the earlier interview and WP(C).No.1966/2015 4 selection was cancelled and the complainant herself submitted an application in terms of the second notification, passed Ext.P7 order on 05.11.2014, stating that the 2nd respondent obtained 1st rank in the interview and if at all 10 marks weightage is given, it will not affect the ranking of the complainant because she obtained 311 marks whereas the 2nd rank holder obtained only 284 marks. Aggrieved by Ext.P7 order, this writ petition is filed.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the 2nd respondent.

3. When this writ petition came up for consideration on 20.01.2015, this Court suspended Ext.P7 order.

4. This Court perused Ext.P7 order. The only ground for allowing the petition by the Ombudsman is that the 2nd respondent obtained 311 marks and she is Rank No.1 in the list. The 2nd rank holder obtained only 284 marks. Therefore, even if the 10 marks weightage is given, the 2nd respondent is entitled for appointment is the finding in Ext.P7. I am not in a position to accept the ground in Ext.P7 for allowing the case of the 2nd respondent.

5. Admittedly a second notification was issued by the WP(C).No.1966/2015 5 Panchayat, as evident by Ext.P2. It is also an admitted fact that even though the 2nd respondent was Rank No.1 in the list prepared based on the first notification, she also submitted application based on Ext.P2 notification. After participating in the selection process based on Ext.P2, the 2nd respondent challenged the second notification. For that reason itself, the Ombudsman ought to have dismissed the petition.

6. Moreover, simply because a person is included in the rank list, there is no indefeasible right to that person to get appointment and the same is a settled position. Here is a case where the Panchayat invited application for selection to the post of Prerak and when the Panchayat understood that the persons who are residing in the respective wards are entitled to get 10 marks more and the selection process was completed without ascertaining where the centre is to be established, the Panchayat, as per Ext.P1 resolution, decided to cancel the earlier notification and the interview conducted. I see no reason to interfere with Ext.P1. The Ombudsman erred in issuing Ext.P7 order directing to appoint the 2nd respondent when a second notification for selecting the Prerak is issued and the 2nd respondent also participated in the WP(C).No.1966/2015 6 selection process. In the light of the same, I am of the considered opinion that Ext.P7 order is unsustainable. Therefore, this writ petition is allowed. Ext.P7 order is set aside. JV sd/- P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE WP(C).No.1966/2015 7 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1966/2015 PETITIONER EXHIBITS P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE PANCHAYATH DT.13.8.14. P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.A2-12224/12 DT. 09.10.14 ISSUED BY THE PANCHAYAT. P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. A2- 12224/12 DT. 13.10.14 ISSUED BY THE PANCHAYAT P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED NIL SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P6 - TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT NO.A2- 12224/12 DT. 01.11.14 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN COMPLAINT NO. 1379/14. P7 - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN COMPLAINT NO. 1379/14 DT. 05.11.14. RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS EXT.R2(A) EXT.R2(B) COPY OF THE RANK LIST DATED COPY OF HTE GUIDELINES FOR APPOINTMENT ‘PRERAK’