This writ petition challenged the Kerala Public Service Commission's rejection of the petitioner's application for the post of Junior Clerk (Co-operative Societies). The court dismissed the petition, holding the petitioner's degree did not meet the specific 'special subject' requirement as he studied Co-operation as a subsidiary subject.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
TUESDAY, THE 7TH OCTOBER 2008 / 15TH ASWINA 1930
WP(C).No. 22977 of 2008(I)
--------------------------------------
PETITIONER:
-------------------
JOSEKUTTY V.J., VARAKUKALAPRAMBIL,POONJAR SOUTH P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN 686 582.
BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN.
RESPONDENTS:
------------------------
1. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR FOR R2, ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS,SC,KPSC FOR R1.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/10/2008, THE COURT ON 07/10/2008 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
prv.
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.22977 of 2008-I
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 7th day of October, 2008.
JUDGMENT
“CR”
1.Petitioner applied for being considered for appointment as Junior Clerk (Co-operative Societies), by direct recruitment, in the Department of Co-operation in the Government of Kerala, following Ext.P1 notification by the Public Service Commission calling for applications from persons possessing qualifications enlisted in column 7 of that notification. Following the objective type written test, a short list was published on 29-22008 and the petitioner was called for interview on 9-4-2008. Upon verification of documents, the first respondent Commission took the view that petitioner did not possess the qualification
WP(C)22977/08 -: 2 :-
prescribed for the post. The petitioner then submitted a petition before the Chairman of the Interview Board requesting that he be allowed to appear for the interview provisionally. Following that, he was admitted for interview, subject to further scrutiny and orders regarding his qualification. He, thereafter, made Ext.P7 representation to the Secretary of the Commission. That did not find favour and the first respondent published Ext.P8 ranked list excluding the petitioner. Hence, this writ petition.
WP(C)22977/08
-: 3 :-
follows:
or
(B)(i) B.A. or B.Sc. or B.Com degree of a recognised University and (ii) Higher Diploma in Co-operation (H.D.C.).
WP(C)22977/08 -: 4 :-
“Special Subject”, satisfying Clause (A).
WP(C)22977/08 -: 5 :-
WP(C)22977/08 -: 6 :-
Subject” is not a “Special Subject”. What is required in terms of Rule 5 of the Rules and Clause (A) in the third column against Category No.2 in the Table thereunder denotes the study of a subject, in quality, additional to ordinary; detailed and exceptional and not the study of that subject as a subsidiary one.
7.Now, as rightly pointed out by the Commission, a perusal of Ext.P3 mark list issued to the petitioner by the University of Kerala would show that Accounting and Co-operation are two main subjects offered by that University among Group C Main Subjects. Petitioner studied Accounting Main as the Main Subject under Group C and Commercial Law, Accounting/Co-operation, Banking and Business Management as Subsidiary Subjects under Group B, while he had not studied Co-operation Main as a main subject under Group C. Therefore, the petitioner cannot claim that he studied Cooperation as the “special” subject leading to the award of Ext.P2 degree to him.
WP(C)22977/08
-: 7 :-
8.The learned counsel for the petitioner stated that his client was admitted to written examination and was subjected to interview. In this regard, I am inclined to accept the version of the Commission that the eligibility of candidates were not verified before the objective type test and all those who had claimed to be educationally qualified, going by the applications, were admitted for the test. There is no illegality in the petitioner having been weeded out at the stage of interview and being permitted to participate in the interview provisionally, after which the Commission decided that the petitioner was unqualified.
9.It was further urged on behalf of the petitioner that he is 50% physically handicapped as evidenced by Ext.P5. Without the basic qualification, the petitioner is not entitled to contend that he was eligible for being considered.
WP(C)22977/08
-: 8 :-
WP(C)22977/08 -: 9 :-
holder without Co-operation as special subject, he ought to possess HDC and not JDC. That apart, Rule 7 does not govern the field of direct recruitment. It would apply only to other modes of recruitment.
For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition fails. The same is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/061008
-true copy-
P.S.to Judge.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a B.Com degree with Accounting as main subject and Co-operation as subsidiary subject satisfies the rule requiring Co-operation as the special subject.
Whether the petitioner could be treated as possessing a B.Com degree with Co-operation as a special subject under Rule 5 of the Kerala Co-operative Subordinate Service Rules, 1962.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to appointment or remission of training under Rule 7(1)(a) given the lack of prescribed qualification in direct recruitment.
JOSEKUTTY V.J.
THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
STATE OF KERALA
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
