Disposed

Devakumar v. Kerala Public Service Commission

Kerala HC15 Jan 2008WP(C)/1056/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, Lower Division Clerks, challenged non-issue of hall tickets for departmental tests due to missing official designations in applications. Court directed petitioners to seek condonation of the lapse from the Public Service Commission, which must decide within two months.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to file a representation seeking condonation of the defect; PC to decide materiality within two months; test participation provisional.

Devakumar Vs Kerala Public Service Commission — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 15TH JANUARY 2008 / 25TH POUSHA 1929

¶5

WP(C).No. 1056 of 2008(A)

¶6

--------------------------------------

¶7

PETITIONERS:

¶8

----------------------

¶9

1. DEVAKUMAR, AGED 38, S/O. DIVAKARAN, LOWER DIVISION CLERK, PRINCIPAL SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶10

2. SHEEBA C.NELSON, AGED 27, D/O. VASANTHA KUMARI, LOWER DIVISION CLERK,

¶11

SUB REGISTRAR'S OFFICE, VENGANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.V.VIJULAL

¶13

RESPONDENTS:

¶14

------------------------

¶15

1. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF K.P.S.C., PATTOM PALACE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-4.

¶16

2. THE JOINT SECRETARY, DEPARTMENTAL TESTS, OFFICE OF THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM PALACE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶17

BY ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS,SC,KPSC

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

Kss

¶20

WPC.NO.1056/2008 A

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶23

EXT.P1:	COPY OF APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION TO DEPARTMENTAL TESTS (SPECIMEN).
EXT.P2:	COPY OF REJECTION MEMO OF 1ST PETITIONER DTD. 18/12/2007.
EXT.P3:	COPY OF REJECTION MEMO OF 2ND PETITIONER DTD. 27/12/07.

/TRUE COPY/

P.S.TO JUDGE

Kss

V.GIRI, J.

W.P.(C).No.1056 of 2008

¶29

Dated this the 15^th day of January, 2008.

¶30

JUDGMENT

¶31

The petitioners are Lower Division Clerks employed in the Sub Registry Office, Thiruvananthapuram. Pursuant to the notification issued by the Public Service Commission for departmental tests, they applied and the examination was scheduled to be held from 10.1.2008 onwards. The petitioners were not issued hall tickets. Hence they approached this court.

¶32

On instructions, it was revealed by the learned counsel for the Public Service Commission that there was a defect in the application form submitted by the petitioners inasmuch as that they had not shown their official designation in the applications.

¶33

This court had passed an interim order on 9.1.2008 requiring the respondents to permit the petitioners to participate in the departmental test on a provisional basis. Accordingly, the petitioners participated. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that there is yet another departmental test, which is scheduled to be conducted shortly.

¶34

After having heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the standing counsel for the Public Service

¶35

W.P.(C).NO.1056/08

¶36

:: 2 ::

¶37

Commission, I am of the view that the question as to whether the defect in the applications in not mentioning their official designations in the application is curable or not is a matter which requires to be considered by the Public Service Commission. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is specific column regarding the petitioners' designation. In fact, column NO.4 is regarding the official address of the applicants. One should also take into account the large volume of the applications received by the Public Service Commission and consequent necessity to adhere to the format for a smooth and expeditious processing of the same. I do not express any final opinion regarding this aspect.

¶38

The writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioners to file a representation pointing out this aspect to the first respondent within two weeks from today. If it is so done, the first respondent shall consider whether the lapse, which has occurred on the part of the petitioners in filling up their applications, is material or not in the specific context of the fact that the test is a departmental test. The Public Service Commission has requisite and adequate authority to take an appropriate decision in this regard in the interest of justice. The Public Service Commission

¶39

W.P.(C).NO.1056/08

¶40

:: 3 ::

¶41

may take a decision on the representation within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Participation of the petitioners in the departmental test on 10.1.2008 and subsequent thereto will be provisional and subject to the decision to be taken by the Public Service Commission in the manner aforementioned.

Sd/-

(V.GIRI) JUDGE

sk/

//true copy//

Devakumar v. Kerala Public Service Commission

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devakumar v. Kerala Public Service Commission

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.N.Mohanadasan Vs Dr.Shylaja

M.a.Mohammed Ali Vs Rajeev Sadanandan

Maram Veettil Sobha Vs S.M.Vijayanand

Vijayakumar & Another Vs J.Sathyadas & Others

Sunil Kumar.K.S. Vs Chief General Manager, Hoc Ltd.

Sini Thomas Vs State of Kerala and Others