Allowed

Sudha K.K v. Kerala Public Service Commission

Kerala HC31 Aug 2016RP/721/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge modified the impugned judgment in a review petition, clarifying that petitioners from Scheduled Caste and Ezhava communities are entitled to appointment via communal rotation for NJD vacancies, despite finding no apparent error on the face of the record.

What did the court decide?

Judgment modified to clarify entitlement for appointment via communal rotation on NJD vacancies.

Sudha K.K Vs Kerala Public Service Commission — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST 2016/9TH BHADRA, 1938 RP.No. 721 of 2016 ()

¶5

---------------------WP(C) 10702/2016 of THIS HON'BLE COURT

¶6

REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/PETTIIONER:

¶7

1. SUDHA K.K., D/O. K.K.KESAVAN, AGED:36 YEARS, KANNIDAMKUZHIYIL NARANGANAM P.O., KOZHENCHERRY - 689642

¶8

2. LEKHA.S W/O M.S SANTHOSH, AGED:41 YEARS, MELEDATHU, ELANTHOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA-689643

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.M.M.MONAYE SRI.T.KOSHY

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THULASSI HILLS, PATTOM PALACE P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004

¶12

2. THE DISTRICT OFFICER KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, DISTRICT OFFICE, PATHANAMTHITTA-689645

¶13

3. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001

¶14

4. THE PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD PATHANAMTHITTA-689645, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER

¶15

RP.No. 721 of 2016 ()

¶16

5. BOARD OF DIRECTORS, THE PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD PATHANAMTHITTA-689645, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL PRESIDENT

¶17

R1 & R2 BY SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, KPSC R3 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. C.S. SHEEJ R4 & R5 BY SRI.JACOB P.ALEX,SC,

¶18

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31-08-2016,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

¶20

SHAJI P. CHALY, J

¶21

R.P.NO.721 OF 2016 in W.P.(C)NO.10702 OF 2016

¶22

Dated this the 31^st day of August, 2016

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

This review petition is filed by the petitioners in the writ petition contending that, since in the judgment it is held that the relief sought for by the petitioners stands satisfied it will create and cause difficulties since the petitioners who are belonging to Scheduled caste community and Ezhava community are entitled to seek appointment through the NJD vacancies earmarked for the community. Therefore, I think it is only appropriate that a clarification to that effect is made in this review petition, even though, I do not find any circumstances or error apparent on the face of the record to review the judgment. Therefore the judgment is modified by clarifying that petitioners will be entitled for appointment, on

¶25

R.P.NO.721 OF 2016 in

¶26

W.P.(C)NO.10702 OF 2016

¶27

¶28

communal rotation if they are eligible in accordance

¶29

with law to the vacancies available.

¶30

Review petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶31

sd/-

¶32

SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE

¶33

R.AV/31/08/2016

Sudha K.K v. Kerala Public Service Commission

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudha K.K 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Krishnankutty Vs Sheik Pareed

Ponnamma John Vs the Primary Co-Operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank

Lijo George Vs Secretary, Regional Transport Authority

O.J. Peter Vs Sri. Antony Chacko

Gomathiyamma Vs Babu Kuriakose

R.Bijumon Vs the Secretary