High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeWrit petitions dismissed

W.P.(C). Nos. 39784 of 2016 (W) & 3403 of 2017 (A) (Dr. A. N. Sringseswara v. State of Kerala & Others; Roby T J v. Kerala Forest Research Institute & Others)

Case / Petition Number:WP(C).NO.39784 OF 2016(W) & 3403 OF 2017 (A)

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • P. V. ASHA
Judgment Date
2019-11-16
Court Decision / Holding
Both writ petitions are dismissed.
Final Disposition
Writ petitions dismissed

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Dr. A. N. Sringseswara
  • Roby T J

Respondents

  • State of Kerala represented by the Secretary to Government, Department of Science and Technology, Secretariat, Thiruvananthapuram-695001
  • Kerala Forest Research Institute (KFRI), Peechi, Thrissur District represented by its Registrar
  • Kerala State Council for Science, Technology and Environment (KSCSTE), Sastrabhavan, Pattom, Thiruvananthapuram represented by its Registrar
  • Dr. Shijo Joseph, Scientist E1 (Remote Sensing), KFRI, Peechi, Thrissur District
  • Director, Kerala Forest Research Institute, Peechi
  • The Selection Committee for Direct Recruitment to the post of Scientist E, represented by its Chairperson, KFRI Peechi

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • K. S. Anil
  • • M. Sasindran
  • • V. Venugopal

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Imam Grigoriou Karat, SC, KFRI
  • • George Zachariah, SC, KSCSTE
  • • O. V. Radhakrishnan (Sr.)
  • • K. Radhamani Amma
  • • Rekha C. Nair

Case Synopsis & Summary

These are consolidated writ petitions challenging the appointment of Dr. Shijo Joseph to the post of Scientist-E1 (Remote Sensing) at the Kerala Forest Research Institute (KFRI). The petitions allege lack of authority for the appointment: the Managing Committee, which is the appointing authority for the post up to the level of F, had its tenure expire in 2014 and was reconstituted only in 2016, thus the February 2016 appointment allegedly lacked valid authority. The petitioners contend that Ext.P9 appointment order and Ext.P8 rank list were issued without a competent Managing Committee, and that the Director of KFRI cannot unilaterally appoint; the Managing Committee’s composition and power are crucial under the Council’s Rules (Rule 16). The petitioners also challenge the qualification criteria and the eligibility of the 6th respondent, arguing that the last date for applications (15.10.2015) and the required five years of post‑doctoral experience in Remote Sensing were not satisfied by the winners, including the 6th respondent, who was appointed on 24.02.2016 after an interview on 20.02.2016. The court examines locus standi, qualifications, and the applicability of precedents on public interest in service matters. It ultimately holds that the petitioners lack standing, finds no illegality in the selection, and dismisses the petitions. The ruling upholds the appointment, declines to order a fresh selection, and leaves the challenged appointments intact as on record.

Provisions of Law Cited

Rule 16 of the Rules and Regulations of the Kerala State Council for Science, Technology and Environment (KSCSTE)

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • In service matters there cannot be any adjudication based on public interest.
  • Locus standi requires the petitioner to possess the prescribed qualification as on the last date fixed for receipt of applications.
  • A writ of certiorari can be issued only at the instance of a candidate who is not qualified for the post.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contend that the appointment of Dr. Shijo Joseph as Scientist-E1 (Remote Sensing) was without authority since the Managing Committee—the appointing authority for posts up to the level of F—had its tenure expire on 22.03.2014 and was not in power at the time of the February 2016 appointment. They point to Ext.P8 (rank list) and Ext.P9 (appointment order) and assert that the selection/appointment was not authorized by a valid Managing Committee. They emphasize the qualification criteria for the post (First Class MSc in Biological Science; PhD with specialization in Remote Sensing; five years of post‑doctoral experience in Remote Sensing related to Forestry/Landscaping) and allege that the 6th respondent did not satisfy these on the last date for application (15.10.2015) as per Ext.P3 notification. They argue the petitioners were not heard or given a fair opportunity and challenge the locus standi of those petitioners who did not meet the qualifications. They rely on public interest and locus standi precedents to emphasize that a writ should not lie for ineligible candidates and that the court should ensure qualified parties are the ones challenging appointments.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents argue that the selection and appointment were validly made by the appropriate authority under the Rules and Regulations; the Managing Committee may have its tenure in question, but Rule 16 allows governance until a new committee is constituted; the Director of KFRI, under the established scheme, has authority to appoint subject to the Managing Committee’s approval. They highlight that the petitioners themselves did not challenge the rejection of their candidatures and failed to meet the prescribed qualifications on the last date; hence they lack standing to challenge the appointment. They rely on precedents that maintain that a writ in service matters cannot be issued by a person who is not qualified, and that the petitioners cannot obtain relief solely on public interest. They contend the rank list and appointment were made following due process and that there was no valid basis to interfere with the selection or call for a fresh process.

Cited Precedents (4)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Madan Lal vs. High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and others(2014) 15 SCC 308PositiveCited to support the proposition that a writ cannot lie for ineligible candidates and that public interest cannot substitute for proper qualification in service matters.
Dr. Umakant Saran vs. State of Bihar and othersAIR 1973 SC 864PositiveUsed to reinforce the locus standi principle and eligibility requirements for challenging appointments.
Hari Nandan Sharan Bhatnagar vs. S.N. Dikshit and anotherAIR 1970 SC 40PositiveCited for the foundational notion that standing in service matters depends on qualification and timely challenge to actions.
B. Srinivasa Reddy vs. Karnataka Urban Water Supply & Drainage Board Employees' Assn. And others2006 (11) SCC 731PositiveReferenced to affirm that challenges must come from those vested with proper qualification and standing in recruitment matters.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against W.P.(C). Nos. 39784 of 2016 (W) & 3403 of 2017 (A) (Dr. A. N. Sringseswara v. State of Kerala & Others; Roby T J v. Kerala Forest Research Institute & Others) and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA** **SATURDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 25TH KARTHIKA, 1941** ## **WP(C).NO.39784 OF 2016(W)** ## **PETITIONER:** **DR.A.N.SRINGESWARA AGED 42 YEARS** **S/O. NAGENDRAIAH, NO.4143/C, "KAUSHIK", 9TH CROSS, SUBRAMANYANAGAR, BANGALORE-590021.** **BY ADV. SRI.K.S.ANIL** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.** - **2 THE KERALA FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE PEECHI, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680653, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.** - **3 KERALA STATE COUNCIL FOR SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT, SASTHRA BHAVAN, PATTOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, PIN-695004.** - **4 DR. SHIJO JOSEPH SCIENTIST E1, REMOTE SENSING DEPARTMENT, KERALA FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE, PEECHI, THRISSUR-680653.** - **BY ADV. SRI.P.ABDUL NISHAD BY ADV. SRI.S.M.PREM BY ADV. SRI.O.V.RADHAKRISHNAN SR. BY ADV. SMT.K.RADHAMANI AMMA BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE ZACHARIAH, SC, KSCSTE BY SRI.IMAM GRIGORIOS KARAT, SC, KERALA FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE BY ADV. SMT.REKHA C.NAIR, GP** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22.10.2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).NO.3403/2017(A), THE COURT ON 16.11.2019 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** ## **WP(C).NOs.39784 OF 2016(W) & 3403 OF 2017 (A)** 2 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA** **SATURDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 25TH KARTHIKA, 1941 WP(C).NO.3403 OF 2017** ## **PETITIONER:** **ROBY T J** **AGED 35 YEARS, S/O. T.D. JOSEPH, THEKKUDAN HOUSE, VENGINISSERY, PARALAM P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT.** **BY ADVS. SRI.M.SASINDRAN SRI.V.VENUGOPAL** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 THE KERALA FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE, PEECHI, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680-653, REPRESENTED BY THE REGISTRAR. 2 THE KERALA STATE COUNCIL FOR SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY ENVIRONMENT, SASTHRABHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 3 THE DIRECTOR KERALA FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE, PEECHI-680 653. 4 THE SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR DIRECT RECRUITMENT TO THE POST OF SCIENTIST E, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, KERALA FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE, PEECHI, THRISSUR-680 653. 5 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY,** **WP(C).NOs.39784 OF 2016(W) & 3403 OF 2017 (A)** 3 ## **SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.** **6 DR. SHIJO JOSEPH SCIENTIST EI REMOTE SENSING DEPARTMENT, KERALA FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE, PEECHI-680 653, THRISSUR DISTRICT.** **BY SRI.IMAM GRIGORIOS KARAT, SC, KERALA FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE ZACHARIAHSCKSCSTE BY ADV. SRI.O.V.RADHAKRISHNAN (SR.) BY ADV. SMT.K.RADHAMANI AMMA BY ADV. SMT.REKHA C.NAIR** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22.10.2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).NO.39784/2016(W), THE COURT ON 16.11.2019 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** ## **WP(C).NOs.39784 OF 2016(W) & 3403 OF 2017 (A)** 4 ## **P.V.ASHA, J.** **--------------------------W.P(C).Nos.39784 of 2016 & 3403 of 2017 ---------------------------Dated this the 16th day of November, 2019** ## **JUDGMENT** Both these writ petitions are filed challenging the appointment of Dr.Shijo Joseph to the post of Scientist-E1 (Remote Sensing) in the Kerala Forest Research Institute (KFRI for short) which is an institution under the control of the Kerala State Council for Science, Technology and Environment (hereinafter referred to as the 'Council'). The parties and documents referred to in this judgment are as described in W.P.(C).No.3403 of 2017 unless expressly specified otherwise. 2. W.P.(C).No.3403 of 2017 was filed on 31.01.2017 challenging Ext.P8 rank list for appointment of Scientist E1 (Remote Sensing) published on 25.02.2016 and Ext.P9 order dated 24.02.2016 offering appointment to Shijo Joseph-the 6th respondent and seeks a declaration that the Director of KFRI does not have ## **WP(C).NOs.39784 OF 2016(W) & 3403 OF 2017 (A)** 5 the authority to make appointment and that appointment can be made only by the Managing Committee. He also seeks a direction to the respondents to conduct a fresh selection. 3. Petitioner herein-Roby T.J Claims that he had submitted application for appointment as Scientist-EI (Remote Sensing) pursuant to Ext.P3 notification issued on 11.09.2015. He is a Post Graduate Degree holder in Botany with Ph.D with post doctoral experience. Pursuant to Ext.P3 notification issued on 11.09.2015, he submitted his application Ext.P4. It is stated that he was not called for interview and was not considered for selection. According to him the 6th respondent does not have Post Graduate qualification in Biological Science. His Post Graduate Degree is in Environment and Management and hence he does not have the qualification for appointment to the post. It is alleged that the 6th respondent is not appointed by the appointing authority. The Managing Committee constituted under the rules of the Council is the appointing authority for the post of Scientists upto the level of F. It is stated that in February 2016 ## **WP(C).NOs.39784 OF 2016(W) & 3403 OF 2017 (A)** 6 there was no Managing Committee in office as the tenure of the Committee had expired on 22.03.2014. It is stated that the Committee was re-constituted only on 27.04.2016 and therefore at the time of appointment there was no Managing Committee in power. Petitioner also claims that refusal to consider his candidature was not proper. Therefore it is alleged that the appointment of the 6th respondent as per Ext.P9 order, was without authority. 4. The 6t **h** respondent has filed a counter affidavit objecting to the locus standi of the petitioner to challenge the selection and appointment of the 6th respondent as petitioner does not even possess the qualification prescribed in the notification. It is pointed out that petitioner did not have 5 years Post Doctoral experience in Remote Sensing as he was awarded Ph.D only on 01.04.2011 that too in Forest Ecology and Environment as evident from his own document Ext.P2. The last date for submitting the application was 15.10.2015. The petitioner could not complete 5 years experience as on that date. Moreover he does not have Ph.D in the relevant ## **WP(C).NOs.39784 OF 2016(W) & 3403 OF 2017 (A)** |||7| |---|---|---| |subject- Remote Sensing||as well as Post Doctoral| |experience as on the||last date of application.| |Petitioner did not choose to challenge the rejection||| |of his candidature. It is stated that there were 18||| |applicants for the|post, but only 2 candidates|| |including the 6<br>th<br>respondent alone were found eligible||| |and qualified and 6<br>th<br>respondent who was ranked No.1||| |was appointed on 24.02.2016 based on the interview||| |conducted on 20.02.2016. It is stated that on||| |29.02.2016, the 6<br>th<br>respondent was informed that the||| |appointment would be|subject to certain cases pending|| |before this Court. It is pointed out that when the||| |petitioner has not challenged the notification or the||| |rejection of his application, the writ petition itself||| |is liable to be rejected.||| 5. It is also pointed out that the term of the Managing Committee is not limited to 3 years as evident from Ext.R6(p) order dated 23.03.2011. Pointing out Rule 16 of the Rules and Regulations of the 2nd respondent Council, it is stated that no term or tenure is prescribed for the Managing Committee and therefore the contention that there was no Managing ## **WP(C).NOs.39784 OF 2016(W) & 3403 OF 2017 (A)** 8 Committee as on the date of appointment of the 6th respondent is baseless. According to the 6th respondent in view of Rule 16 which provides that there shall be a Managing Committee for each centre, the Managing Committee constituted as per Ext.R6(p) would continue in office till a new Managing Committee is constituted in accordance with rules. ## **W.P.(C).No.39784 of 2016** 6. This Writ Petition was filed on 14.12.2016 challenging the appointment of Dr.Shijo Joseph, who is th the 4 respondent, who was appointed in February 2016. According to the petitioner Dr.Shijo Joseph does not have the qualifications notified and there was no managing Committee in existence. He seeks a declaration that the term of the Managing Committee expired on 22.03.2014 and all proceedings of the Managing Committee including approval of the selection committee minutes and appointment order issued are bad and seeks a direction to respondents to conduct a fresh selection with qualified candidates and make appointment to the post. He has stated that he is a Post Graduate in Botany with Ph.D in Applied Botany ## **WP(C).NOs.39784 OF 2016(W) & 3403 OF 2017 (A)** 9 and that he has undergone a course conducted by the Indian Institute of Remote Sensing. He claims that he submitted application for the post of Scientist-E1 (Remote Sensing) as he is fully qualified. It is stated that petitioner was not called for interview; he came to know about the appointment only later and on enquiry it was found that petitioner does not have the qualification for the post and there was no Managing Committee in power. 7. The 4th respondent has filed a counter affidavit objecting to the locus standi of the petitioner pointing out that he is not qualified for appointment to the post; his candidature was already rejected and he has filed the Writ Petition even without challenging the decision of the Screening Committee or the rank list which was published in February 2016. He has also not sought for a direction for considering his candidature or a declaration as to the illegality of his non-consideration. 8. Learned Senior Counsel for the party respondent, relying on the judgments in _**Madan Lal vs. High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and others: (2014)15**_ 10 ## **WP(C).NOs.39784 OF 2016(W) & 3403 OF 2017 (A)** _**SCC 308 , Dr.Umakan Saran vs. State of Bihar and others:AIR 1973 SC 864, Hari Nandan Sharan Bhatnagar vs. S.N.Dikshit and another:AIR 1970 SC 40, B.Srinivasa Reddy vs. Karnataka Urban Water Supply & Drainage Board Employees' Assn. And others : 2006 (11)**_ _**SCC 731**_ etc., argued that a person who himself is not having the qualification prescribed for a post cannot have any right to challenge the selection and a writ will not lie at the instance of a person who is not eligible or incompetent to hold the post and that a writ of certiorari can be issued only at the instance of a candidate who is not qualified for the post. 9. Heard both sides. First of all it is necessary to examine the locus standi of the petitioners in both these Writ Petitions to challenge the rank list or appointment. Admittedly these petitioners did not have any complaint over the rejection of their candidature. In order to consider the correctness of an appointment the persons who are challenging the same have to show that they are having the prescribed qualification as on the last date prescribed and would be the person benefited by the decision. ## **WP(C).NOs.39784 OF 2016(W) & 3403 OF 2017 (A)** 11 10. The qualifications prescribed for the post are : First class M.Sc in Biological Science; Ph.D in any branch of Biological Science with specialization in Remote Sensing and five years Post Doctoral experience in Remote Sensing in relation to Forestry/Landscaping. While the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.3403 of 2017 had not even completed 5 years after his Ph.D, the petitioner in the other case does not have even a case that his Ph.D is with specialization in Remote Sensing. Thus both of them have not substantiated that they are qualified for appointment to the post. 11. Both of them did not challenge the rejection of their candidature. In these writ petitions also they do not have any complaint over the rejection of their application. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.39784 of 2016 does not have any complaint against the rank list published in 2/2016 till December 2016. 12. As the petitioners have not challenged the rejection of their candidature, even in these Writ Petitions and from the pleadings it is seen that they have not substantiated that they are duly qualified for appointment to the post, the petitioners cannot ## **WP(C).NOs.39784 OF 2016(W) & 3403 OF 2017 (A)** 12 have any valid complaint against the appointment of Dr.Shijo Joseph. It is settled law that in service matters there cannot be any adjudication based on public interest. Petitioners cannot be said to be aggrieved by the appointment to a post to which they are not qualified as on the last date fixed for receipt of application. 13. In these cases petitioners sought to approach this Court only in December 2016 and January 2017, when the appointment was made in February 2016. Regarding the contention that the appointment is not made by the Managing Committee Shijo Joseph relies on Rule 16 of the Rules which does not prescribe any tenure. Even assuming it otherwise, no writ can be issued at the instance of the petitioners who were ineligible to apply for the post. They did not even choose to challenge the rejection of their candidature. Even these the writ petitions were filed after about one year of the appointment. In the light of the judgments of the Apex court in _**Dr.Umakant Saran's case (supra), Hari Nandan Sharan Bhatnagar's case (supra)**_ , _**B.Srinivasa Reddy's case (supra),**_ I find ## **WP(C).NOs.39784 OF 2016(W) & 3403 OF 2017 (A)** 13 that the petitioners in these cases do not have the locus standi to challenge the appointment and I deem it unnecessary to go into the contentions raised by the petitioners in these Writ Petitions. 14. Though it is pointed out that Dr.Shijo Joseph has since left the KFRI for taking up another appointment, that also will not confer any right on petitioners to challenge his appointment. Accordingly both these writ petitions are dismissed. **==> picture [37 x 45] intentionally omitted <==** Sd/- **P.V.ASHA JUDGE** AS ## **WP(C).NOs.39784 OF 2016(W) & 3403 OF 2017 (A)** 14 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 39784/2016** **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DEGREE CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF DOCTORAL DEGREE.** - **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COURSE CONDUCTED BY THE INDIAN INSTITUTE OF REMOTE SENSING CERTIFICATE.** - **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 119-2015.** - **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 202-2016.** - **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT MEMO. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE 28TH MEETING OF THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE.** - **EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDERS CONSTITUTING THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE.** - **EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER TO THE EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT ON 27-4-2016.** **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT R1** NIL. **EXHIBIT R2** NIL **EXHIBIT R3** NIL **EXHIBIT R4** NIL **EXHIBIT R4 A** PHOTOCOPY OF THE RANK LIST OF SCIENTIST E-1 (REMOTE SENSING) DATED 25.02.2016. ## **WP(C).NOs.39784 OF 2016(W) & 3403 OF 2017 (A)** 15 **EXHIBIT R4 B** PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.DR-24/KFR1/16(D) DATED 24.02.2016 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. **EXHIBIT R4 C** PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTE NO.E229/KFRI/ESTT/2016 DATED 29.02.2016 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. **EXHIBIT R4 D** PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.D14/KFRI/ESTT/75 DATED 24.02.2016 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. **EXHIBIT R4 E** PHOTOCOPY OF THE DECISION OF 42ND MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE KERALA STATE COUNCIL FOR SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT (KSCSTE FOR SHORT) HELD ON 29.06.2015. **EXHIBIT R4 F** PHOTOCOPY OF THE AGENDA FOR THE 42ND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING AND THE NOTIFICATION APPROVED BY THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AS ITS 42ND MEETING. **EXHIBIT R4 G** PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.68/11/KSCSTE DATED 23.03.2011 RECONSTITUTING THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE. **EXHIBIT R4 H** PHOTOCOPY OF THE M.SC IN ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT DEGREE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY DATED 25.11.2004. **EXHIBIT R4 I** PHOTOCOPY OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE BRANCH OF ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT IN 2005 BY THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY DATED 04.07.2005. **EXHIBIT R4 J** PHOTOCOPY OF THE P.HD CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY DATED 15.09.2010. **EXHIBIT R4 K** PHOTOCOPY OF THE FRONT PAGE OF THE P.HD THESIS AND AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS. **EXHIBIT R4 L** PHOTOCOPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 10.11.2015 PHOTOCOPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 10.11.2015 ISSUED BY THE RESEARCH DIRECTOR, FOREST AND ENVIRONMENT PORTFOLIO, CENTRE FOR INTERNATIONAL FORESTRY RESEARCH. **EXHIBIT R4 M EXHIBIT R4 N** PHOTOCOPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 10.03.2016. PHOTOCOPY OF THE PRINT OUT OF LIST OF RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS FROM THE WEB-SITE OF GOOGLES SCHOLAR. **EXHIBIT R4 O** PHOTOCOPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE DEAN, FACULTY OF ENVIRONMENT AND ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES OF THE SCHOOL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY CERTIFYING THAT THE SYLLABUS AND COURSE STRUCTURE OF M.SC ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT COULD BE CONSIDERED AS EQUIVALENT TO M.SC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE. ## **WP(C).NOs.39784 OF 2016(W) & 3403 OF 2017 (A)** 16 **EXHIBIT R4 P** PHOTOCOPY OF THE COURSE DETAILS RETRIEVED FROM THE WEB-SITE OF THE M.G.UNIVERSITY. **EXHIBIT R4 Q** PHOTOCOPY OF THE ACADEMIC PROGRAMMES OFFERED BY THE SCHOOL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY RETRIEVED FROM THE OFFICIAL WEB-SITE OF THE M.G.UNIVERSITY. ## **WP(C).NOs.39784 OF 2016(W) & 3403 OF 2017 (A)** 17 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3403/2017** **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF POST GRADUATE DEGREE THERE IS M.SC. BOTANY OF THE PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE PH.D CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED ON 4-11-2011.** - **EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 11-92015 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE POST OF SCIENTIST E1 (REMOTE SENSING).** - **EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE POST GRADUATE CERTIFICATE OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE PH.D CERTIFICATE IN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27-4-2016 ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR.** - **EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE RANK LIST DATED 25-22016.** - **EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF APPOINTMENT DATED 24-2-2016 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 6TH RESPONDENT.** ## **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT R6A PHOTOCOPY OF THE SHORT-LIST FOR THE POST OF SCIENTIST E1 REMOTE SENSING OBTAINED UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT AS PER REPLY DATED 01-02-2017.** **EXHIBIT R6B PHOTOCOPY OF THE RANK LIST OF SCIENTIST E-1 (REMOTE SENSING) DATED 25-02-2016.** **EXHIBIT R6C PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.DR 24/KFRI/16(D) DATED 24-02-2016 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** ## **WP(C).NOs.39784 OF 2016(W) & 3403 OF 2017 (A)** 18 **EXHIBIT R6D PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTE NO.E229/KFRI/ESTT/2016 DATED 29-02-2016 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT R6E PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.D14/KFRI/ESTT/75 DATED 24-02-2016 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT R6F PHOTOCOPY OF THE DECISION OF 42ND MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE KERALA STATE COUNCIL FOR SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT (KSCSTE FOR SHORT) HELD ON 2906-2015.** - **EXHIBIT R6G PHOTOCOPY OF THE AGENDA FOR THE 42ND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING AND THE NOTIFICATION APPROVED BY THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AT ITS 42ND MEETING.** - **EXHIBIT R6H PHOTOCOPY OF THE M.SC IN ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT DEGREE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY DATED 25-11-2004.** - **EXHIBIT R6I PHOTOCOPY OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE BRANCH OF ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT IN 2005 BY THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY DATED 04-07-2005.** - **EXHIBIT R6J PHOTOCOPY OF THE P.HD CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY DATED 15-092010.** - **EXHIBIT R6K PHOTOCOPY OF THE FRONT PAGE OF THE P.HD THESIS AND AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS.** - **EXHIBIT R6L PHOTOCOPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 10-112015 ISSUED BY THE RESEARCH DIRECTOR, FOREST AND ENVIRONMENT PORTFOLIO, CENTRE FOR INTERNATIONAL FORESTRY RESEARCH.** - **EXHIBIT R6M PHOTOCOPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 10-032016.** - **EXHIBIT R6N PHOTOCOPY OF THE PRINT OUT OF LIST OF RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS FROM THE WEB-SITE OF GOOGLE SCHOLAR.** - **EXHIBIT R6O PHOTOCOPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE DEAN, FACULTY OF ENVIRONMENT AND ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES OF THE SCHOOL OF** ## **WP(C).NOs.39784 OF 2016(W) & 3403 OF 2017 (A)** 19 **ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY.** **EXHIBIT R6P** **PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23-03-2011 RECONSTITUTING THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE.**