Judgment :- 1. The petitioners in these original petitions, in all 51 in number, were advised by the Public Service Commission for appointment as Work Assistants in the service of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (K.S.R.T.C.) represented by the 1st respondent. They were advised for appointment during the year 1980 and 1981 towards the quota due for non-I. T. I. candidates. It would appear that as per a long term industrial settlement the quota for appointment of I. T. I. and non-I.T.I. candidates to the category of Work Assistants bad been fixed as 1:1. 2. Vacancies in the posts of Work Assistants were notified to the P.S.C. in March 1977 and selection of candidates was made early in the year 1978. The P.S.C. in April 1978 forwarded an advice list for appointment of 1126 candidates towards the quota due to I.T.I. candidates. Some time thereafter the P.S.C. forwarded another advice list for appointment of 1124 non-I.T.I. candidates as Work Assistants. All the I.T.I, candidates advised were appointed in due time. Among the 1124 non-I.T.I. candidates advised, the K.S.R.T.C. appointed only 762 candidates. The remaining 362 candidates were not appointed. The petitioners are among those 362 candidates who have not been appointed in spite of the advice by the P.S.C. 3. K.S.R.T.C. in its counter affidavit has stated, that the 362 non-I.T.I. candidates advised could not be appointed for the reason of Ext. R1(b) order of Government dated 24-6-1985 wherein it was stated that no further recruitment of provisional or regular hands will be made except to the extent necessary to fill up vacancies by Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes candidates. Ext. R1(b) provides also for a progressive reduction of the bus-staff ratio initially to 9 and finally to 7.5 before the end of the seventh plan period. 4. There was a special recruitment of candidates belonging to the SC/ST under R.17A of the K. S. & S.S.R. and the P.S.C. on 16-5-1983 advised 132 SC/ST candidates for appointment as Work Assistants. In pursuance to the said advice 116 candidates were appointed. There was a subsequent special recruitment on 20-6-1983 of candidates belonging to the SC/ST for appointment as Work Assistants under R.17A. The P.S.C. on 20-3-1986 advised the appointment of 36 candidates on the basis of special recruitment. There was a subsequent advice on 31-5-1986 for the appointment of 87 candidates under the special recruitment underR.17A. There was a subsequent special recruitment on 20-6-1983 of candidates belonging to the SC/ST for appointment as Work Assistants under R.17A. The P.S.C. on 20-3-1986 advised the appointment of 36 candidates on the basis of special recruitment. There was a subsequent advice on 31-5-1986 for the appointment of 87 candidates under the special recruitment underR.17A. These candidates were not however appointed for the reason of the orders of stay passed by this Court pending these original petitions. 5. The petitioners were selected and advised for appointment towards the vacancies notified to the P.S.C. as early as in March 1977. The special recruitment of SC/ST candidates were long after the vacancies to which the petitioner were advised had been notified to the P.S C. and the PSC. had, after selection, submitted an advice list to the K.S.R.T.C. R.17A authorises the State Government to reserve: "a specified number of posts in any service, class, category or grade to be filled by direct recruitment exclusively from among the members of Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribes". Such reservations can relate only to posts remaining vacant or arising in future, and not to posts to which the PSC. has already submitted an advice list. One of us (Balakrishna Menon, J.) in OP. No. 1992 of 1984 dealing with a similar situation held: "Failure to make appointment in pursuance to the advice given by the PSC. cannot be justified on the ground that there was a subsequent selection and advice by the PSC. by way of special recruitment as per R.17(A) of the KS. & SSR. The subsequent advice can relate only to vacancies existing subsequent to the earlier notification of vacancies to the PSC, for which it has already made a selection and submitted the advice-list". This decision was confirmed by a Division Bench of this Court in WA. No. 570 of 1984. It is thus clear that the special recruitment envisaged under R.17A of the KS. & SSR. can relate only to prospective vacancies and cannot affect the candidates already advised for appointment. The petitioners were advised for appointment to posts not reserved for SC/ST candidates and their advice was earlier in point of time than the SC/ST candidates advised for appointment after the special recruitment. 6. & SSR. can relate only to prospective vacancies and cannot affect the candidates already advised for appointment. The petitioners were advised for appointment to posts not reserved for SC/ST candidates and their advice was earlier in point of time than the SC/ST candidates advised for appointment after the special recruitment. 6. Learned counsel for the KSRTC, submits that all the vacancies earlier notified are not now available for appointment for the reason of the reduction of bus-staff ratio and consequent abolition of several of the posts notified to the PSC. But in view of the facts adverted to earlier, counsel for the KSRTC. fairly concedes that the petitioners will be given preference in appointment as and when appointments are made hereafter. This will not, however, preclude the creation of supernumerary posts for absorption of SC/ST candidates advised for appointment under the special recruitment after the petitioners are appointed to the respective posts to which they had been advised by the PSC. These original petitions are disposed of as above. No costs.