Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

B. OMANAKUTTAN versus STATE OF KERALA

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


B. OMANAKUTTAN v. STATE OF KERALA - WP(C) No. 9737 of 2006(H) [2007] RD-KL 3827 (21 February 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 9737 of 2006(H)

1. B. OMANAKUTTAN,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent

2. THE CHAIRMAN,

3. THE SECRETARY,

4. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES,

5. THE DISTRICT OFFICER,

6. THE DISTRICT OFFICER,

7. THE GENERAL MANAGER,

8. MR. P. GOPAKUMAR,

9. MR. R.SREEKUMAR,

For Petitioner :SRI.SIVARAM

For Respondent :SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, KPSC

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.PADMANABHAN NAIR

Dated :21/02/2007

O R D E R

K.Padmanabhan Nair,J.

W.P.(C).No.9737 of 2006-H

Dated, this the 21st day of February, 2007



JUDGMENT

The grievance of the petitioner is that his application for the post of General Manager of the District Co-operative Bank was illegally rejected by the Public Service Commission. The affidavit filed by the Public Service Commission shows that the candidate must acquire the academic qualification first and thereafter he must undergo practical experience of three years. On the date of application, the petitioner had practical experience, but he did not have three years practical experience after acquiring the qualification. The counsel for the petitioner contended that if that is the criterion, the Public Service Commission ought not have called respondents 8 and 9 for interview. Public Service Commission in its counter affidavit has stated that it came to the notice of the Public Service Commission that certain persons who ought not have called for interview were called, but those persons were not included in the W.P.(C).No.9737 of 2006-H final rank list. Admittedly the additional 10th respondent is now working as General Manager. He is possessed of qualification and experience. No useful purpose will be served by enquiring the circumstances under which the Public Service Commission called respondents 8 and 9 for interview. So, the writ petition is only to be closed. In the result, the writ petition is closed. K.Padmanabhan Nair Judge vku/-


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.