JUDGMENT : V.G. ARUN, J. 1. The University of Calicut is in appeal against the judgment by which the learned Single Judge directed the appellant to immediately pass orders granting category change to the petitioners in two of the available vacancies of Assistants. 2. A conspectus of the essential facts are as under: The writ petitioners had joined the appellant University on 22.7.2010 and 24.7.2010 respectively and are working as Upper Division Typists, redesignated as Computer Assistants Grade-I. The Calicut University First Ordinances, 1978 provides for change of category from the post of Typist to the post of Assistant. As per the stipulation in the Schedule relating to Non-teaching Staff appended to the First Ordinances, Typists without degree who have completed five years service and Typists who have secured a degree and completed three years service shall be allowed category change as Assistants. The petitioners being Typists with degree and having completed three years of service as on 22.7.2013 and 24.7.2013 respectively, submitted Exhibits P1 and P2 representations dated 23.9.2013 and 30.11.2013, seeking category change as Assistants. The representations were rejected by the University on the premise that as per G.O(P)No.3/08-H.Edn. dated 5.1.2008, appointments to the post of Assistant shall be by way of direct recruitment only. 3. Aggrieved by the rejection of the request for category change, the petitioners along with six other similarly situated persons filed W.P(C).No.7738 of 2015. The specific contention in that writ petition was that the right for category change provided under the First Ordinances cannot be curtailed through an executive order of the Government. In that writ petition, this Court issued Exhibit P3 interim order directing eight vacancies of Assistants to be kept vacant. WP(C).No.7738 of 2015 was thereafter considered along with other writ petitions and disposed of under Exhibit P4 common judgment. In Exhibit P4 rendered by one among us (Vinod Chandran, J), it was found that the Government order G.O(P)No.3/08-H.Edn. dated 5.1.2008, in so far as it is in conflict with the First Ordinances, is not binding on the University and that the University will have to move in accordance with the First Ordinances, subject to any amendments to the First Ordinances being assented to by the Chancellor. 4. dated 5.1.2008, in so far as it is in conflict with the First Ordinances, is not binding on the University and that the University will have to move in accordance with the First Ordinances, subject to any amendments to the First Ordinances being assented to by the Chancellor. 4. According to the petitioners, in order to defeat their claim for change of category, 259 persons were directly recruited to the post of Assistants during the pendency of W.P(C).No.7738 of 2015 and another 70 appointed after disposal of the writ petition. Thereafter, in purported compliance of Exhibit P4 order, the University issued Exhibit P12 order followed by Exhibit P5 Circular inviting willingness from eligible persons from the cadre of Computer Assistant for by-transfer promotion to the post of Assistant as per the provisions of the Calicut University First Ordinances, 1978. By Exhibit P9, the University published the list of Computer Assistants promoted as Assistants based on their request for category change submitted pursuant to Exhibit P5. The petitioners' names were not included in Exhibit P9. In fact, Exhibit P9 contained the names of only two among the petitioners in W.P(C).No.7738 of 2015. In the meanwhile, the University issued Exhibit P12 order. 5. The instant writ petition was thereupon filed challenging Exhibits P5, P12 and P9 mainly on the ground that the First Ordinances allows Clerical Assistants and Typists, who have the requisite qualification, to opt for a category change promotion and does not contemplate invitation of applications for change of category from willing employees. The other contention is that the right of the petitioners to claim category change, as requested in Exhibits P1 and P2 having been found in their favour under Exhibit P4 judgment, cannot be defeated by issuing Exhibit P9 seeking to effect promotion/category change on the basis of seniority among the applicants. 6. The appellant University opposed the prayers and contended that the petitioners had failed to respond by expressing their willingness for category change pursuant to Exhibit P5 Circular whereas, seven Computer Assistants had offered their willingness. That, the Vice Chancellor had ordered to include all the Computer Assistants who had approached this Court by filing writ petitions, while preparing the seniority list of Computer Assistants for category change to the post of Assistant. Accordingly, the seniority list of Computer Assistants eligible for category change was revised to include the petitioners also. That, the Vice Chancellor had ordered to include all the Computer Assistants who had approached this Court by filing writ petitions, while preparing the seniority list of Computer Assistants for category change to the post of Assistant. Accordingly, the seniority list of Computer Assistants eligible for category change was revised to include the petitioners also. On such revision, the petitioners were placed at 14th and 12th positions respectively and therefore could not be appointed to the eight available vacancies. It is further contended that as per the Kerala Public Service Commission (Additional Functions as Respects the Services Under the Universities) Act, 2015, appointments to the non-teaching posts of the Universities in Kerala is entrusted to the Kerala Public Service Commission. That, as per Rule 3(1) of the above Act, notwithstanding anything contained in the University Acts, the Statutes, Ordinances, Regulations and the Rules made there under, it shall be the duty of the Public Service Commission to prepare select list for appointment by direct recruitment of employees to the non-teaching posts of a University. That, the Government of Kerala had issued G.O(P)No.7/2016/H.Edn. dated 26.2.2016 prescribing the qualification, age, method of appointment etc. for the post of Assistant and Computer Assistant Grade-II in the Universities, as per which the method of appointment to the post of Assistant is by way of direct recruitment. That, the Government order has been implemented in the University vide UO No.5924/2016/Admn. dated 7.5.2016 and UO No.6920/2016/Admn. dated 3.6.2016. It is hence contended that category change from the post of Computer Assistant to that of Assistant is no longer in vogue and the only method available for appointment to the post of Assistant is direct recruitment through the Public Service Commission. 7. In the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge, after taking note of Exhibit P4 judgment under which it was held that the Government order to the extent it restricts category change, is against the provisions of the First Ordinances and directs consideration of the petitioners' request for category change, as also the fact that out of the eight vacancies, only three were filled up pursuant to Exhibits P5 and P9, directed the University to immediately pass orders granting category change to the petitioners in two of the available vacancies. The question as to whether the petitioners would be entitled to seniority over the contesting respondents, who had submitted their options for category change much later than the petitioners, was left to be considered by the University strictly in conformity with the First Ordinances and the requirements therein. 8. The finding in the impugned judgment regarding the right of the petitioners for category change cannot be assailed in view of the specific finding in Exhibit P4 judgment which has become final. As a matter of fact, the University has also recognised this right, as would be evidenced from Exhibits P5, P9 and P12 itself. The relevant portion of Exhibit P12 is extracted below: “As per the judgment in WP(C) No.27816 of 2013, the Hon.High Court of Kerala inter alia ordered that, the Government Order, G.O.(P) No.3/08/H.Edn. dated 05.01.2008, insofar as it is in conflict with the First Ordinance is found to be not binding on the University and the University would have to move in accordance with the First Ordinance, subject to any amendments being assented to by the Chanceller. Smt.Khadeeja E, Sri.Jafar O., Sri.Bijesh K, Smt.Dhanalakshmi K.K, Smt.Sheeja K, Smt.Sethulakshmi, Smt.Manjula P and Smt.Sajna M, Computer Assistants, the petitioners in the above writ petition have requested for granting promotion to the post of Assistant by considering the judgment in WP(C) No.27816 of 2013 and 7738/2015 dated 01/03/2016. As per the interim direction of the Hon'ble High Court in W.P(C).No.7738/2015 (N) dated 20.03.2015, 8 vacancies of Assistants are set apart for the category change of Computer Assistants to the post of Assistants. The Hon'ble Vice-Chancellor has ordered to place the matter of granting promotion from the post of Computer Assistant to the post of Assistants as per the Judgment in W.P(C).No.27816 of 2013 and 7738/2015 before the syndicate for consideration. As per paper read as 4th above, Syndicate at its meeting held on 22.10.2016, vide item No.2016.1067 (Confirmed vide item No.2016.1112 on 03.12.2016) considered the matter of granting category change from the post of Computer Assistant to the post of Assistant in the wake of the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in WP(C) No.27816 of 2013 and in WP(C) No.7738/2015 dated 01.03.2016 and resolved to approve. Vide item referred to as 5th above, the Hon'ble Vice-Chancellor accorded sanction to implement the above syndicate resolution and also ordered to take urgent action to invite the willingness for by transfer promotion as per the provisions of the CUFO 1978 based on the judgment, and also intimate the action taken report in this regard to the Standing counsel. The following orders are, therefore, issued; I) The resolution of the Syndicate at its meeting held on 22.10.2016, vide item No.2016, 1067 (Confirmed vide item No.2016, 1112 on 03.12.2016) to grant category change from the post of Computer Assistant to the post of Assistant in the wake of the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in WP(C).No.27816 of 2013 and in WP(C).No.7738/2015 dated 01.03.2016 is implemented. II) Willingness will be invited from the eligible persons in the cadre of Computer Assistant for by transfer promotion to the post of Assistant as per the provisions of the CUFO 1978 based on the above judgment of Hon. High Court.” 9. In its counter affidavit, the University has stated that out of the eight persons granted sanction for category change, only three persons assumed charge and five persons declined. It was in that context that direction was issued to grant category change to the petitioners to two of the five available vacancies. The petitioners having submitted requests for category change in the year 2013 and their right for category change having been declared under Exhibit P4 judgment, the Kerala Public Service Commission (Additional Functions as Respects the Services Under the Universities) Act, 2015 or the Government orders issued in terms of the enactment and implementation of those orders by the University would not in any manner affect the already crystallised right of the petitioners. In such circumstances, we see no reason to interfere with the findings in the impugned judgment. The writ appeal is therefore dismissed. No order as to costs.