Summary
Candidates in the 2013 Kerala police recruitment list could not claim non-joining-duty vacancies reported after that list expired on 1 June 2016. Under the special training-course proviso, the list ceased one month after the last advised batch began training. Earlier litigation did not justify further extension on these facts. The Full Bench could decide the entire dispute under the omnibus reference and Section 7 of the Kerala High Court Act.
Issues
- Whether the Full Bench exceeded the reference by deciding the recruitment dispute.
- When the first ranked list expired under the training-course proviso.
- Whether equitable maxims entitled the candidates to subsequently reported vacancies.
Provisions considered
- Section 7, Kerala High Court Act, 1958Enabled final disposal by the Full Bench in the circumstances of the omnibus reference. (¶¶ 22, 23)
- Rule 13, first proviso; Rule 14, Kerala Public Service Commission Rules of Procedure, 1976Applied the special expiry rule for training leading to automatic appointment and the requirement that vacancies be reported during the list’s life. (¶¶ 24, 25, 26, 27)
Held
- Ordinarily a Full Bench confines itself to referred issues, but the scope depends on the reference. Here the Division Bench referred the batch for resolution without formulating a specific narrow question; Section 7 enabled final decision, including examination of facts necessary to apply the governing rules. (¶¶ 22, 23)
- The special first proviso to Rule 13 governed training leading to automatic appointment. The last advised batch began training on 1 May 2016, so the first ranked list ceased on 1 June 2016. The Court affirmed that date rather than the Commission’s earlier expiry premise based on publication of the second list. (¶¶ 24, 25, 26)
- The Commission cannot advise from an expired list against non-joining-duty vacancies reported after expiry. The 93 vacancies reported on 12 July 2016 were unavailable to candidates in the first list and had to be filled from the appropriate subsequent list. (¶ 27)
- The earlier Tribunal order did not wholly interdict operation of the list. The subsequent Supreme Court restriction was lifted upon disposal, followed by final advice and commencement of training. No prejudice from a court order justified further relief under actus curiae neminem gravabit or lex non cogit ad impossibilia on these facts. (¶¶ 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31)
Result
Appeals dismissed; Full Bench judgment upheld. No costs; pending interlocutory applications disposed of.