Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

CHITHRA.L., W/O.ANILKUMAR.P. versus KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


CHITHRA.L., W/O.ANILKUMAR.P. v. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION - WP(C) No. 3597 of 2007(C) [2007] RD-KL 2668 (6 February 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 3597 of 2007(C)

1. CHITHRA.L., W/O.ANILKUMAR.P.,
... Petitioner

2. LAILA MUHAMMED, W/O.MUHAMMED RAFFI.U,

Vs

1. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,
... Respondent

2. THE DISTRICT OFFICER,

For Petitioner :SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.K.DENESAN

Dated :06/02/2007

O R D E R

K.K. DENESAN, J.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 3597 OF 2007 C = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Dated this the 6th February, 2007



J U D G M E N T

The petitioners find a place in the short list published by the respondent-Commission for the post of Lower Division Typist in various departments in Alappuzha District. Based on Ext. P1 notification inviting applications, it is contended that K.G.T.E. certificate in Computer Word Processing or equivalent qualification has been prescribed as a qualification for the post. The complaint of the petitioners is that candidates who do not possess the requisite qualification are being allowed to participate in the selection process and the respondent-Commission is not conducting proper verification of the certificates produced by such candidates. The relief prayed for in this writ petition includes direction to the respondents to exclude the unqualified candidates, ie. candidates who do not have K.G.T.E. certificate in Computer Word Processing from the short list and to declare that the equivalency referred to in Ext. P1 notification means equivalency certificate issued by WPC No. 3597/2007 -2- competent authorities who are legally empowered to issue such certificates by the Government.

2. Ext. P5 is the short list. Counsel for the Commission submits that a close scrutiny of the documents including the certificates showing the acquisition of qualification has not been completed and that the verification is going on. The Commission will take appropriate decision before the final ranked list is published.

3. I have no reason to assume that the Commission will not perform its duty to weed out unqualified persons and to prepare the ranked list in accordance with law. It is unnecessary for this Court to issue any specific direction to the Commission at this stage of the proceedings particularly in the absence of pleadings identifying the concerned or so called unqualified candidates.

4. The petitioners will have the right to approach this Court in case it is found that any omission contrary to law has happened at the hands of the Commission, after publication of the ranked list. The WPC No. 3597/2007 -3- writ petition which is premature is dismissed with the above observations. K.K. DENESAN

JUDGE

jan/


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.