Anoop K.A. v Plantation Corporation of Kerala Limited; R.S. Rajeev v Plantation Corporation of Kerala Limited

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA** **THURSDAY ,THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 4TH MAGHA, 1940** **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **ANOOP.K.A., AGED 30 YEARS, S/O. KOLLENDAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PALARIVATTOM P.O., KOCHI-682025.** **BY ADVS. SRI.S.RAMESH SRI.NAVEEN.T** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** - **1 THE PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR, MUTTAMBALAM P.O, KOTTAYAM-04.** - **2 THE MANAGER P AND A DEPARTMENT PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA, MUTTAMBALAM P.O., KOTTAYAM-04.** - **3 RAJEEV R.S.RAMAKRISHNA VILASAM NELLIMUGAL P.O., MANAKKALA VIA, PATHANAMTHITTA, NOW WORKING AS MANAGER COMMERCIAL PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA, MUTTAMBALAM P.O., KOTTAYAM-04.** - **4 THE DIVISIONAL EMPLOYMENT OFFICER (P&E) REGIONAL PROFESSIONAL AND EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE, KANDATHIL BUILDING, KARSHAKA ROAD, ERNAKULAM-682016.** **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 2 **5 SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT (PERSONAL AND RESOURSE DEVELOPMENT), P & ARD, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM-01.** **BY ADVS. SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS SMT.K.JASMIN BABY SMT.C.S.SINDHU KRISHNAH SMT.K.S.SUMITHA SMT.LIJITTA G.MATHEW SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH (SR.) SRI.RAJESH N. SC SRI.RAJU SEBASTIAN VADAKKEKARA SC SRI.R.SANJITH SR.GP.SMT.MARY BEENA JOSEPH** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24.01.2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).17787/2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 3 **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA** **THURSDAY ,THE 24TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 4TH MAGHA, 1940** **WP(C).No. 17787 of 2014** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **R.S. RAJEEV AGED 41 YEARS S/O.SREEDHARAN NAIR, RAMAKRISHNAVILASOM, P.O.NELLIMUGAL, PIN-691551, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT** **BY ADVS. SRI.R.SANJITH SMT.C.S.SINDHU KRISHNAH** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** **1 THE PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA LIMITED KOTTAYAM-4, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2 AGRICULTURAL (PU) DEPARTMENT GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033 REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY. 3 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (INT.) VIGILANCE & ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 033. 4 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM** **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 4 **ADDL.R5. ANOOP K.A., AGED 35 YEARS S/O.ACHUTHAN K.I., KOLLENDAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PALARIVATTOM P.O., KOCHI- 682026, (ADDITIONAL R5 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 24.01.2019 IN I.A.NO.11029 OF 2017.)** **BY ADVS. SRI.RAJU SEBASTIAN VADAKKEKARA, SC, SRI.RAJESH N. SC SRI.S.RAMESH** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** **SR.GP.SMT.MARY BEENA JOSEPH** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24.01.2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).5044/2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 5 ## **J U D G M E N T** Both these writ petitions relate to the very same post of Manager (Commercial) in the Plantation Corporation (hereinafter referred to the 'Corporation'). W.P.(C).No.5044 of 2012 was filed challenging the selection and appointment made to the post and W.P.(C) No. 17787 of 2014 is filed by the person appointed as the Manager (Commercial) apprehending termination. Therefore these writ petitions were heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment. The parties and documents referred to in this judgment are as described in W.P. (C) No.17787 of 2014 unless otherwise specified. 2. Petitioner was appointed as Manager (Estate) under the first respondent Corporation on 17.11.1997. He is a Graduate in Science with MBA. While working so, in the year 2010 the Corporation conducted a selection for appointment to the post of Manager (Commercial) in the scale of pay of Rs.7800-12975, after submitting ## **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 6 requisition to the Employment Exchange and also by notifying the same on 28.01.2010, in newspapers. Petitioner submitted application for the same. On being ranked 1 after the interview conducted by a selection committee, he was appointed as Manager (Commercial) as per Ext.P8 order dated 24.02.2011 based on which, he joined the post on 28.02.2011. As per Ext.P9 order dated 26.04.2012, his probation was declared and he was confirmed in the post with effect from 13.09.2011. While so, Government as per Ext.P10 proceedings informed the then Managing Director that the petitioner's appointment as Manager (Commercial) was found to be in violation of provisions of Articles 69 and 115 of Articles of Association, as per the quick verification report from the Director of Vigilance and Anti corruption Bureau and it was stated that the matter requires examination. Pursuant to this, the Managing Director, as per Ext.P11 note dated 13.12.2013 called for the explanation of the petitioner, as **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 7 against the finding of the Vigilance and Anti corruption Bureau that his appointment was irregular for being violative of Article 69 and 115 of Articles of Association of the Corporation. It was also stated that the Vigilance had also found that he was not relieved from his earlier post of Estate Manager before being appointed as Manager (Commercial), in which post he could have drawn a salary considerably lower than what he was drawing as Estate Manager. Petitioner submitted Ext.P12 explanation and immediately thereafter petitioner filed this writ petition, apprehending termination of service. 3. Petitioner has stated that there were 12 posts of Estate Managers in the Corporation. As per Ext.P2 minutes, the Board of Directors in their meeting held on 27.01.2009 accorded sanction for conversion of one among the 12 posts of Manager (Estate) as Manager (Commercial). That decision was taken stating that there was a need of professionally qualified persons to ## **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 8 look after the sales and purchases in the Corporation and therefore Managing Director suggested to convert one post of Manager (Estate) as Manager (Commercial). Apart from according sanction for the conversion, the Board of Directors had also fixed the method of appointment and qualification as well as the scale of pay for the post. The method of appointment was by direct recruitment; employees in service of the Corporation were also made eligible to apply for the post. The qualification was fixed as MBA (Marketing) along with a minimum of three years Managerial Experience and minimum of two years experience in the purchase/sales activities in large or medium organization. Age limit was fixed as not exceeding of 40 years and scale of pay was that of Manager (Estate). The Board authorized the Managing Director to issue notification and to decide the duties and responsibilities of the Manager (Commercial). Government thereafter issued Ext.P3 order dated **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 9 23.12.2009 according sanction for conversion of one of the posts of Manager (Estate) in the Corporation to that of Manager (Commercial) with qualification as prescribed by the Board of Directors. It was stated that the scale of pay would be the same as that of Manager (Estate) and there would not be any additional financial commitment. Thereafter Corporation sent Ext.P4 requisition to the Employment Exchange on 27.01.2010 for selection and appointment to the post of Manager (Commercial). An advertisement Ext.P5 was also made in leading dailies, calling for applications from qualified hands fixing the last date as on 09.02.2010. In Ext.P4 requisition, as against the entry “details of reservation of vacancies” it was stated: “as per rules”. It was further mentioned as “Unreserved (Open Competition)”: “Open”. However in Ext.P5 nothing was stated with respect to any reservation or otherwise. 4. In the meeting held on 05.01.2011, as per Ext.P6 minutes, the Board of Directors constituted a ## **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 10 sub committee consisting of the Chairman, the Managing Director, 5 Directors and a nominee of Agriculture Department, to conduct the interview to the post of Manager (C) and Manager (F&A). The sub committee conducted the interview on 27.01.2011 and prepared Ext.P6 evaluation statement, in which petitioner scored higher marks (67.5). The additional 5[th] respondent, who is the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.5440 of 2012 was just below him with 57 marks. The petitioner was thereupon appointed as Manager (Commercial) as per Ext.P8 order dated 24.02.2011 and he joined duty on 28.02.2011, as per Ext.P8(a) joining report. In the 369[th] meeting the Board of Directors noted the appointment of the petitioner. Petitioner's probation was declared as per Ext.P9 order dated 26.04.2012 with effect from 13.09.2011. The quick verification report was submitted by the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau on 31.12.2012, based on which Government issued Ext.P10 letter informing that the irregularities in the **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 11 ## appointment required to be examined. 5. The petitioner points out that the Government had accorded sanction for conversion of the post and Board of Directors had constituted a selection committee and made the appointment. According to the respondents, a quick verification report was called for in which irregularity was found in the selection. Petitioner has produced Ext.P14 quick verification report of the Superintendent of Police submitted before the Director of Vigilance and Anti corruption Bureau on 28.11.2012, along with the recommendation of the Director in his letter dated 31.12.2012 before the Government in Vigilance Department, based on which Ext.P10 letter was issued by Government. In Ext.P14 quick verification report, the petitioner's appointment was found to be made in violation of the Articles 69 and 115 of the Articles of Association. Disciplinary action was recommended against the then Managing Director for making such appointment and for admitting **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 12 the petitioner in the post. It was found that the creation of the post was with Government sanction; petitioner, who was Manager (Estate) in charge of Manager (P&A) was rank No.1 in the interview; the Managing Director appointed him on 28.02.2011; but petitioner joined duty on the same day without obtaining a relieving order from the previous post ; it was found that the appointment was irregular as prior approval of the Director Board and the Government and hence it was in violation of Articles 69 and 115 of the Articles of Association. It was stated that the petitioner was earning more salary than in the present post, while he was working as Manager (Estate) and his attraction for the post of Manager (Commercial) was in charge of all the purchases made from the Plantation Corporation. 6. This writ petition was filed immediately after submitting Ext.P12 explanation in which petitioner pointed out there was no irregularity in the ## **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 13 appointment. 7. The respondent Corporation as well as Government have filed separate counter affidavits reiterating the anomalies found by the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau and the decision taken by the Secretary to Agriculture Department to re-examine the appointment of Manager (Commercial) as per Ext.R1(c). According to the respondents, prior approval of Board of Directors is required under Article 69, for appointment to posts carrying pay above Rs.500 and prior approval of Hon'ble Governor is necessary under Article 115 of the Articles of Association for appointment to the post carrying the pay above Rs.2280/-. Such prior approval is not obtained before appointing petitioner. It is stated that selection and appointment was made at a time when petitioner himself was in the charge of Manager (P&A) and he was bound to ensure and observe the formalities prescribed in the Articles of Association. It is stated that the ## **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 14 Corporation had sought legal advice with respect to the anomalies and irregularities found against the appointment of the petitioner and therefore further proceedings are not taken during the pendency of the writ petition. 8. The additional 5[th] respondent has filed W.P. (C).No.5044 of 2012 challenging the appointment of the petitioner. His contention is that petitioner, who was working in the Corporation as Manager, was appointed without honoring the list received from Employment Exchange; petitioner was not included in the list of candidates sponsored by Employment Exchange; no advertisement was issued inviting applications; the principles of reservation were not observed; petitioner was the Manager of the P&A Department which prepared the evaluation statement and rank list and hence he himself prepared the rank list making him rank No.1; addl.5[th] respondent belongs to Ezhava community in OBC. According to him, when the post of Manager (Commercial) ## **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 15 is one of the posts in the Unit of the Managers where there are altogether 12 posts, the next turn in the Unit was to be filled up by a person belonging to Ezhava/Thiyya/Billava community and he was the person liable to be appointed in accordance with the communal rotation. According to him, petitioner who was in charge of the selection process managed the entire process in such a way that he got the first rank. 9. At the time of hearing certain contentions were raised regarding the qualification of the petitioner. However, in the writ petition, no such ground is seen raised. Therefore, I am not going into those aspects. 10. In the counter affidavit filed in this first writ petition, the Corporation has justified the appointment of the petitioner as Manager (Commercial), stating that appointment was made in accordance with law. Producing the requisition furnished before the Employment Exchange and the notification issued in **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 16 Malayala Manorama inviting applications for the post, the respondent Corporation refuted the contention and stated that the name of petitioner was included in the list of candidates forwarded by the Employment Officer on 25.02.2010, along with that of additional 5[th] respondent, producing the list. Pointing out that the Employment Officer sponsored the name of only two candidates and therefore an advertisement was made based on which seven candidates were also considered. The 1[st] respondent also stated that reservation cannot be observed for appointment against a solitary post. It was stated that the post was not notified as a reservation vacancy. In the requisition, it was shown as Open Competition. Explaining the basis of awarding marks and the importance of the experience gained by the petitioner, the Corporation justified the appointment and stated that rank list was published after careful evaluation of merit of candidate. Apparently the quick verification report of the **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 17 Vigilance Department was much thereafter. 11. It is the case of the petitioner as well as the Corporation that the Manager (Commercial) is a solitary post and therefore, there cannot be any reservation, as settled by a series of judgments. (see **State of U.P. v. Bharat Singh** [(2011) 4 SCC 120], **Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research v Faculty Association** [(1998) 4 SCC 1], **Muraleedharan Nair v Kerala Agricultural University** [1998(2) KLT 680]). 12. The learned Counsel for the additional 5[th] respondent argued that since the post in question is one in the very same Unit of Manager where 11 are of Manager (Estate) and 1 is of Manager (Commercial), it cannot be treated as a solitary post and therefore communal reservation should be applied. The learned Counsel also relied on the judgment of this Court in **Preetha A.K v State of Kerala** [2017(4) KHC 107] and argued that the appointment made without observing **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 18 communal reservation is liable to be set aside. 13. The respondents do not have a case that the number of posts of Manager (Commercial) is more than 1. Therefore, the contention raised by the petitioner that appointment is bad for non-observance of principles of reservation is unsustainable. The judgment in **Preetha** 's case was in entirely different circumstances, where the appointment was to one of the 5 Industrial Tribunals and Government had decided to observe the principles of reservation. That judgment will not be of any help to petitioner. The Corporation has explained that appointment was made after evaluation of merit. Therefore, the contentions raised by additional 5[th] respondent against the appointment of petitioner are unsustainable. 14. With respect to the proceedings pursuant to the quick verification report, a decision is yet to be taken. Vigilance has found that the conversion of the post was only after Government accorded sanction. While **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 19 according sanction the qualification and method of appointment was also ratified by Government. The Vigilance has not found any irregularity in the selection conducted or the rank list. The irregularity found is as to the absence of prior approval for appointment from Board of Directors and from Governor, as provided in Articles 69 and 115 of Articles of Association. Another finding is that petitioner did not produce the relieving order before he joined as Manager (Commercial). However, the respondents admit that petitioner was working under the very same employer in another post, when he joined the new post. 15. As petitioner has already submitted Ext.P12 explanation and no decision is taken on it, I am of the view that it is only appropriate that a final decision is taken in the matter. Therefore, it will not be proper for this Court to consider the case on merits. As the explanation is sought based on the direction of Government, it is only proper that Government considers **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** **==> picture [12 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** the explanation of petitioner before a final decision is taken. In the above circumstances, I find that the petitioner in W.P.(C).No.5044 of 2012 does not deserve any relief. The writ petition is dismissed. In W.P.(C).No.17787 of 2014 is disposed of, directing that Government shall take a decision on Ext.P12, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of 'three months' from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Till orders are passed no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner. **==> picture [55 x 12] intentionally omitted <==** **P.V.ASHA, JUDGE.** SPR/AS ## **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 21 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5044/2012** **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** - **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE M.B.A CERTIFICATE.** - **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE S.S.L.C BOOK.** - **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE AGENDA DATED 25.05.2009.** - **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER OF THE PERFORMA DATED 27.01.2010.** **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PERFORMA DATED 27.01.2010.** - **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RANK LIST. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION UNDER R.T.I DATED 19.11.2011.** **EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION FURNISHED UNDER R.T.I DATED 03.01.2012.** **EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION FURNISHED BY 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 13.01.2012.** - **EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT TO 4TH RESPONDENT 04.03.2011.** - **EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 23.03.2011.** - **EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE CHARGE MEMO DATED 21.08.2000.** - **EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ALLEGATION DATED 21.08.2000.** **RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT R1 A** TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO.346-OA/13 DATED 29.05.2009 AUTHORISING THE MANAGING DIRECTOR. **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 22 **EXHIBIT R1 B** TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER NO.2132/09/AD DATED 23.12.2009. **EXHIBIT R1 C** TRUE COPY OF THE REQUISITION FORM DATED 27.01.2010 ISSUED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT. **EXHIBIT R1 D** TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION PUBLISHED IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 01.02.2010. **EXHIBIT R1 E EXHIBIT R3 A** TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.10/28 DATED 25.02.2010. TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 16.03.2018. **EXHIBIT R3 B EXHIBIT R3 C** TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT LETTER OF MR.RENJITH SENAN M.I DATED 14.10.1999. TRUE COPY OF THE SSLC CERTIFICATE OF MR.RENJITH SENAN M.I. **EXHIBIT R3 D** TRUE COPY OF THE RESIGNATION PROCEEDINGS ACCEPTING THE RESIGNATION OF MR.RENJITH SENAN M.I DATED 02.08.2013. **EXHIBIT R3 E** TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE ROTATION CHART AVAILABLE IN THE WEBSITE OF THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION. - **EXHIBIT R3 F** TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT FOR GETTING SANCTION TO CONVERT ONE POST OF MANAGER ESTATE TO MANAGER COMMERCIAL DATED 19.10.2009. ## **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 23 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17787/2014** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 EXT.P1 - A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLE OF ASSOCIATION OF PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA LIMITED EXHIBIT P2 EXT.P2 - A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 29-5-2009. EXHIBIT P3 EXT.P3 - A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER G.O(RT)NO.2132/09/AD DATED 23-12-2009 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 EXT.P4- A TRUE COPY OF THE REQUISITION FORM OF ESTABLISHMENT DATED 27-1-2010 EXHIBIT P5 EXT.P5 - A TRUE COPY OF THE NEW PAPER PUBLICATION DATED 28-1-2010 EXHIBIT P6 EXT.P6 & P6(A) - A COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF 366TH BOARD MEETING HELD ON 5-1-2011 AND A COPY OF EVALUATION STATEMENT HELD ON 27-12011 EXHIBIT P7 EXT.P7 - A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE PROCEEDINGS UNDER ITEM NO.369/OA EXHIBIT P8 EXT.P8 & P8(A) - A TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 24-2-2011 AND COPY OF THE JOINING REPORT OF THE PETITIONER DULY ACKNOWLEDGED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28-2-2011 EXHIBIT P9 EXT.P9 - A TRUE COPY OF THE DECLARATION OF THE PROBATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 26-42012 EXHIBIT P10 EXT.P10- A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 25-7-2013 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** ## **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 24 **EXHIBIT P11 EXT.P11 - A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 13-12-2013 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT SEEKING EXPLANATION FROM THE PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P12 EXT.P12 - A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 19-12-2013 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER** **EXHIBIT P13 EXT.P13 - A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 9- 1-2014 STATING THE PAY REVISION - SCALE PAY EXHIBIT P14 EXT.P14 - A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 31-12-2012 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT** **RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT R1 A** TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05.05.2001 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY MANAGING DIRECTOR, THE PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA LTD. **EXHIBIT R1 B** TRUE COPY OF THE CONDITIONAL REPORT, DATED 28.11.2012. **EXHIBIT R1(B)(A)** TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF VIGILANCE AND ANTICORRUPTION BUREAU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 31.12.2012. **EXHIBIT R1 C** TRUE COPY OF THE D.O LETTER DATED 25.07.2013 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY, AGRICULTURAL DEPARTMENT. **EXHIBIT R1 D** TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, THE PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA LTD., DATED 30.03.2006. **EXHIBIT R1 E** TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 21.07.2014 BY THIS RESPONDENT. **EXHIBIT R1 F** TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE MINUTES OF THE 402TH MEETING OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS HELD ON 25.06.2014. **EXHIBIT R1 G** TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 23.01.2015, RECEIVED FROM GOVERNMENT. **EXHIBIT R1 H** TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE MINUTES OF THE 412TH MEETING HELD ON 19.05.2015 DATED 14.06.2016. **EXHIBIT R1 I** TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT FILED BY THE SUB-COMMITTEE. **EXHIBIT R1 J** TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE RESOLUTION PASSED IN THE 424TH MEETING HELD ON 19.04.2016. **WP(C).No. 5044 of 2012 & 17787 of 2014** 25 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN G.O.(RT.)NO.2132/09/AD, DATED 23.12.2009 BY THE GOVERNMENT. **EXHIBIT R1 K** TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN G.O.(RT.)NO.2132/09/AD, DATED 23.12.2009 BY THE GOVERNMENT. **EXHIBIT R1 L** TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27.01.2010 SENT TO THE EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE BY THIS RESPONDENT. **EXHIBIT R1 M** TRUE COPY OF THE LIST/LETTER DATED 25.02.2010 RECEIVED FROM NATIONAL EMPLOYMENT SERVICE (KERALA). **EXHIBIT R1 N** TRUE COPY OF THE EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER, DATED 03.01.1996. **EXHIBIT R1 O** TRUE COPY OF THE DEGREE CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER. TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27.01.2010 SENT TO THE EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGE BY THIS RESPONDENT. TRUE COPY OF THE LIST/LETTER DATED 25.02.2010 RECEIVED FROM NATIONAL EMPLOYMENT SERVICE (KERALA).