Read Time: 15 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court on November 4, 2024, slammed the Kerala Public Service Commission for resorting to "falsehood" and making a volte-face regarding its stand on eligibility criteria for candidates to the post of Lower Division Clerk in the Kerala Water Authority. 

"A State instrumentality seized of the solemn responsibility of making selections to public services must maintain a high standard of probity and transparency and is not expected to remain nebulous as to its norms or resort to falsehoods before the Court, contrary to what it had stated in its earlier sworn affidavits," a bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Sanjay Kumar said.

The court upheld the Kerala High Court's division bench judgment which confirmed the view taken by a single judge non-suiting candidates with DCA/higher qualifications who aspired for selection to the post of Lower Division Clerk in the Kerala Water Authority.

Dismissing the appeal filed by the Kerala Public Service Commission, the bench noted that it was the KPSC, with its vacillating and dithering stance, that was largely responsible for this long-pending litigation, impacting the lives, hopes and aspirations of nearly twelve hundred candidates. 

The court noted that the KPSC was steadfast in its stand in the earlier round of litigation and that DCA was not a qualification to be considered eligible for appointment to the subject post of LDC in the Kerala Water Authority. 

"Thereafter, the change in its stance, without any foundational inquiry to determine the superiority of the so-called higher qualifications over the prescribed qualification, leaves this Court with no doubt that it was a purely whimsical and arbitrary exercise of discretion on its part without actual application of mind as per required parameters," the bench said.

The matter related to issuance of a notification on July 16, 2012 for filling up 102 existing vacancies and 43 anticipated vacancies in the said post. As many as 1192 applications were received in response thereto. The qualifications were a degree in any discipline and a certificate in Data Entry and Office Automation of minimum 3 months (120 hours) duration awarded by Lal Bahadur Shastri Centre for Science and Technology (LBS), Institute of Human Resource Development (IHRD), or from similar/equivalent institution approved by the Government.

Those having higher qualification of Diploma in Computer Application approached the High Court's single bench which allowed their plea and directed the KPSC to revise the notification. On appeal by the KPSC, the division bench set aside the single bench judgment.

However, despite this judgment in its favour, the KPSC surprisingly chose to shortlist candidates in a ranked list by including persons who held DCA qualification or other higher qualifications. 

On a writ petition by the candidates, the High Court's single judge bench noted that the KPSC had changed its stance despite carrying the matter in appeal on the earlier occasion and held that the KPSC could not be permitted to alter its stand. It allowed the petition and directed the KPSC to recast and rework the ranked list, by excluding candidates who were not qualified, and to publish a modified ranked list by including therein only those candidates who possessed the requisite qualification as prescribed in the 2012 notification.

Writ appeals before a division bench by some of the selected candidates with higher qualifications were dismissed.

Taking up the batch of appeals including by the KPSC, the top court said, "With a tortuous trajectory spanning over a dozen years, this weary litigation craves closure. Hanging in balance is recruitment to several posts of Lower Division Clerk (LDC) in the Kerala Water Authority."

The court noted that the qualification set out in the 2012 notification for the post of LDC was strictly in keeping with the qualification prescribed in ‘Wing II – Ministerial Service’ in the Kerala Water Authority (Administrative, Ministerial and Last Grade) Service Rules, 2011.

The bench also found it was clear and certain that a qualification equivalent to a Certificate in Data Entry and Office Automation from Lal Bahadur Shastri Centre for Science and Technology, Institute of Human Resource Development, was not acceptable but a Certificate in Data Entry and Office Automation from a Government approved similar/equivalent institution was valid. 

It was the case of the appellants that they possessed either a Diploma in Computer Applications or other higher qualifications, such as a Diploma in Computer Engineering/Diploma in Data Entry and Console Operation/MCA/ M.Sc. in Software Engineering, etc. 

The Secretary of the KPSC filed an additional affidavit on April 20, 2024, wherein he brazenly stated that the submission before the High Court earlier was never that qualifications such as DCA from all institutions would be rejected. 

"This statement is incorrect on the face of it as the KPSC had categorically stated, both in its review petition as well as the grounds of appeal in the earlier round, that DCA qualification would not be accepted by it as a qualification for selection to the notified post. It had also asserted that it examined the issue in detail and decided that applications of persons with DCA qualification could not be accepted," the bench said.

The KPSC then filed an additional affidavit on September 02, 2024, stating by its Secretary that recognition of DCA as a higher qualification was not a one-time isolated decision but a well-considered practice that the KPSC consistently applied in various selections over several years.

"Notwithstanding this change in its approach, there is no getting over the fact that in the earlier round of this litigation, the KPSC was uncompromising in its refusal to consider DCA as an eligible qualification for appointment to the post of LDC in the Kerala Water Authority," the bench said.

"It is apparent that the KPSC did a volte-face thereafter, be it for whatever reason, and now seeks to adopt a stand that DCA should be treated as a higher qualification which presupposes the lesser qualification of the prescribed Certificate in Data Entry and Office Automation," the bench added.

The court also pointed out that no material had been placed before it to demonstrate that the KPSC undertook any exercise to study the curriculum of each of the courses in question to assess and decide whether any of the so-called ‘higher qualifications’ could be said to presuppose acquisition of the lesser qualification prescribed for the post. 

Without undertaking this exercise, the bench emphasised, the KPSC could not straightaway assume that, merely because the higher qualification was a Degree/Diploma in a computer-related subject, a candidate possessing the same had more experience and expertise in data entry and office automation than a candidate with the prescribed Certificate in Data Entry and Office Automation. 

With this, the bench said, "We, therefore, have no hesitation in placing the blame for this entire imbroglio on the KPSC as it laid the genesis for this litigation owing to its changing stances at different points of time...We can only hope that the Kerala Public Service Commission learns from this experience and desists, at least in future, from trifling with the lives, hopes and aspirations of candidates who seek public employment."

The court found no error in the High Court's judgment and dismissed the appeals.

Case Title: Anoop M and others Vs Gireeshkumar T M and others ETC