The petitioner has applied to the Kerala Public Service Commission ('the Commission') for selection to the post of Driver in the service of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation ('the Corporation'). According to the petitioner, he belongs to Latin Catholic community and therefore, he claimed the benefit of reservation available to the said community also in the application. The petitioner secured rank No.4737 in the said selection. Since the number of vacancies arose during the currency of the ranked list exceeded the number of candidates included in the ranked list, all the candidates included in the ranked list were advised for appointment without fixing their turn in accordance with the principles of communal rotation. Since the candidates were advised without fixing their turn in accordance with the principles of communal rotation, they were informed that there will be changes in the seniority when their WP.(C).No.11074/2016-H.
2 turn in accordance with the principles of communal rotation is fixed later. Pursuant to the advice, the petitioner was appointed and he is working, as such, in the Corporation. While so, a gradation list of Drivers in the service of the Corporation was published, wherein, persons placed below the petitioner in the ranked list have been assigned seniority over the petitioner. It is stated by the petitioner that while the Commission fixed the turn of the candidates advised for appointment later, the petitioner has not been given benefit of reservation and the anomaly referred to above occurred on account of the said reason. According to the petitioner, he is entitled to the benefit of reservation available to the members of Latin Catholic community and the decision of the Commission in declining the said benefit to him is illegal. The petitioner took up the issue before this Court in WP.(C).No.4792 of 2008 and this Court disposed of the said writ petition as per Ext.P11 judgment, directing the Commission to re-consider the claim of the petitioner for re-fixation of his ranking position in the final advice list. Pursuant to Ext.P11, the Commission issued Ext.P12 communication to the petitioner stating that he is not entitled to WP.(C).No.11074/2016-H.
3 the benefit of reservation available to Latin Catholic Community. Ext.P12 communication is under challenge in this writ petition.
2. The Commission has not filed any counter affidavit in this matter. The Commission had in fact filed a counter affidavit in WP.(C).No.4792 of 2008. Though the said counter affidavit is not part of the records in this case, the learned counsel for the petitioner has made available to me a copy of the said counter affidavit for perusal.
3. The short question that falls for consideration is whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of reservation available to Latin Catholic Community. The specific case of the petitioner is that he had produced Ext.P1 community certificate issued by the Tahsildar certifying that he belongs to Latin Catholic Community and that therefore, there is no justification for not extending the benefit of reservation claimed by him. The materials on record indicate that in the application preferred before the Commission, the petitioner has stated that he belongs to "Nadar-OBC Community". It is conceded that the community of the petitioner as shown in his SSLC Book is "R C Christian Nadar". Ext.P1 is the community certificate issued to the WP.(C).No.11074/2016-H.
4 petitioner by the Tahsildar, Neyyattinkara. In Ext.P1, it is stated that the petitioner belongs to Latin Catholic Community which is designated as a backward class in the State of Kerala. Since Ext.P12 communication issued to the petitioner by the Commission does not contain any reason, the petitioner has obtained the file notes which led to Ext.P12 decision. Ext.P13 is the file notes of the Commission which led to Ext.P12 decision. Ext.P13 file notes indicate that the Commission has denied the benefit of reservation claimed by the petitioner as he has not produced any community certificate in accordance with the claim in the application. The fact that the petitioner has produced a community certificate indicating that he belongs to Latin Catholic Community is admitted in the counter affidavit filed by the Commission in WP.(C).No.4792 of 2008. Since the community certificate stated to have been produced by the petitioner as referred to in the counter affidavit filed by the Commission in the earlier writ petition is not part of the records, it is only reasonable to infer that the Community certificate referred to in the counter affidavit filed by the Commission in the earlier writ petition is Ext.P1. It is all the more so since the said fact is WP.(C).No.11074/2016-H.
5 admitted in Ext.P7 communication issued by the Commission to the petitioner. As noted above, the claim of the petitioner in the application preferred before the Commission was that he belongs to "Nadar-OBC Community". From Ext.P1, it is evident that the petitioner belongs to the Latin Catholic Community. The question, therefore, is whether the Commission is justified in denying the benefit of reservation to the petitioner merely for the reason that he has stated in the application that he belongs to "Nadar-OBC Community". Ext.P14 is a circular issued by the Commission for guidance to deal with cases of candidates who claim that they belong to Latin Catholic Community based on community certificates issued by the revenue authorities, but having entries as "R C Christian Nadar" in school records as in the case of the petitioner. In Ext.P14, it is clarified that in such cases, benefit of Latin Catholic Community shall be given to the candidates. The case of the petitioner is one covered by Ext.P14 circular. The petitioner, therefore, is entitled to the benefit available to the Latin Catholic Community.
In the result, the writ petition is allowed and Ext.P12 communication of the Commission is quashed. The Commission WP.(C).No.11074/2016-H.
6 is directed to re-fix the turn of the petitioner and issue necessary communication to the Corporation so as to enable them to revise the gradation list. This shall be done within two months from today.
Sd/-
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.
Kvs/-
// true copy //