Manjula Chellur,CJ
Appellant was the writ petitioner before learned Single Judge who was unsuccessful in her endeavour. Ext.P4 provisional seniority list prepared by Department of Health Services, so far as admissions to Post Graduate Course of 2014 is under challenge. According to petitioner, the prospectus does not clearly indicate how the deputation period of candidates has to be calculated, so far as calculating minimum service and for seniority. Even otherwise, there is discrimination inter se by excluding deputation period in the case of certain candidates and including deputation period for other categories.
2. Learned Single Judge, after indicating and distinguishing between two kinds of service, opined that there is justification in such exclusion of deputation, so far as person going on for Writ Appeal No.806 of 2014 2 higher studies or unauthorized absence or on leave without allowance and inclusion of such period so far as candidates who were deputed to autonomous institutions, projects societies and other agencies under the administrative control of Health Department. Since appellant was deputed for higher studies, length of seniority of actual physical service in the concerned department has to be counted, excluding the period of deputation when the candidate was pursuing higher education., therefore, dismissed writ petition. Aggrieved by the same, present appeal is filed
3. According to appellant’s counsel, prospectus indicated different calculation of deputation period for similarly placed candidates, therefore, there is no justification in carving out such difference. Firstly, appellant has not challenged the provisions in the prospectus and secondly when the length of seniority of actual physical service in the concerned department alone has to be taken into account for calculating period of deputation, when a candidate is on leave without allowance or on deputation for higher studies or unauthorized absence, such candidate’s actual physical service will not be rendered in the department to count Writ Appeal No.806 of 2014 3 such period in service. This being the criterion or the basis for distinguishing between two kinds of deputation, we are of the opinion, no grounds are made out to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed.
MANJULA CHELLUR, CHIEF JUSTICE
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE.
sj21/06