The High Court dismissed appeals against the Kerala Administrative Tribunal's order upholding the KPSC's academic marking formula. The Court ruled that the graded credit system, despite varying formats, was not arbitrary or violative of Articles 14 and 16.
No relief granted; the appeals against the Tribunal's order were dismissed.
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 A.M.SHAFFIQUE
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942
OP(KAT).No.111 OF 2020
AGAINST THE ORDER IN OA (EKM) 2267/2018 DATED 07-11-2019 OF KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONER/1st APPLICANT IN OA:
VIDHUN.M, AGED 31 YEARS S/O.K.P.MADHUSOODANAN, VERUMBRABGOTE (H), PO ERANHIKKAL, KANDAMKULANGARA, CALICUT-673303.
BY ADVS. SRI.S.PRASANTH (AYYAPPANKAVU) SMT.VARSHA BHASKAR SRI.JYOTHISH D.MONY
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS & APPLICANTS 2-3 IN OA:
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
-:2:-
R5 BY ADV. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY R5 BY ADV. SMT.N.SANTHA R5 BY ADV. SRI.V.VARGHESE R5 BY ADV. SRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO R5 BY ADV. SMT.L.ANNAPOORNA R5 BY ADV. SHRI.VISHNU V.K. R5 BY ADV. SMT.K.N.REMYA R5 BY ADV. KUM.ABHIRAMI K. UDAY R6 BY ADV. SRI.T.V.JAYAKUMAR NAMBOODIRI OTHER PRESENT:
R1 & R3 SRI. T. RAJASEKHARAN NAIR- SR. G.P. R2 BY SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, PSC
THIS OP KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-12-2020, ALONG WITH OP(KAT).112/2020, THE COURT ON 21-12-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
-:3:-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942
OP(KAT).No.112 OF 2020
AGAINST THE ORDER IN OA (EKM) 260/2019 DATED 07-11-2019 OF KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONERS/APPLICANTS 1, 3 & 4 IN OA:
1 JAYESH BABU K.R. AGED 39 YEARS S/O. K. KARUNAN, K.R. HOUSE, P. O. CHEKKIKULAM, VIA KOODALI, KANNUR - 670 592, KERALA.
2 SUJITH R., AGED 32 YEARS S/O. RAMANUJAN PILLAI K., SCMS SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY, KARUKUTTY, ANGAMALY, KERALA.
3 SANOJ VARGHESE AGED 34 YEARS S/O. P. P. VARGHESE, PADAYATTIL HOUSE, CHIRANGARA, KORATTY EAST P. O., THRISSUR - 680 308, KERALA.
BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J.
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
-:4:-
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS, APPLICANTS 2, 5 & 6 IN OA:
OTTAYAM MALABAR, KANNUR - 670 643, KERALA.
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
-:5:-
8 KEDAR MOHAN AGED 33 YEARS S/O. MOHAN DAS, RESIDING AT FLAT NO.3009, VRINDAVAN HOUSING COLONY, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004, KERALA.
10 S. JAGAJITH AGED 30 YEARS
S/O. K. S. SATHIS CHANDRAN, RESIDING AT KUNKU, KAITHOORKONAM, MURATHALA, NEMOM P. O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 020 - ADDITIONAL R7 TO R10 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 22.5.19 IN MA(E) 858/2019, KERALA.
11 RAMU RAJEENDRAN
S/O. RAJEENDRAN NAIR, AMRUTHAM, MRA 22, AKG GARDENS, AYODHAYA NAGAR, MANIKANDESWARAM P. O., VATTYOORKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 013) IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 25.6.2019 IN MA(E) 883/2019, KERALA.
12 MANOJKUMAR G. R. AGED 40 YEARS
S/O. P. GANADHARAN PILLAI, WORKSHOP INSTRUCTOR AT CENTRAL POLYTECHNIC, VATTIYURKAVU, NEYYATINKARA P. O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 121 (IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 8.7.2019 IN MA(E) 1238/2019), KERALA.
13 JAYADEVAN R. AGED 31 YEARS
S/O. RABINDRANATH, RESIDING AT DEVAPRABHA, NAGALASSERY P. O., KOOTANAD,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT - 679533. (ADDITIONAL R13 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 24.7.2019 IN THE MA(E) 1355/2019, KERALA.
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
-:6:-
14 DHANISH JOSE AGED 31 YEARS S/O. JOSE SEBASTIAN, URUMPUKATTU HOUSE, GREEN GARDENS HOUSING COLONY, ANGAMALY - 683 572, KERALA.
16 HARISH K. (DELETED) S/O. KUNHAMBU NAIR A., KURATHIKUND HOUSE, MUNNAD, KASARGOD - 671 541, KERALA.
R15 AND R16 ARE DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY AT THE RISK OF PETITIONERS AS PER ORDER DATED 04.08.2020 IN I.A.1/20 IN OP(KAT)112/2020.
R6 BY ADV. SRI.NIRMAL V NAIR R7-8, R11 BY ADV. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY R7-8, R11 BY ADV. SMT.N.SANTHA R7-8, R11 BY ADV. SRI.V.VARGHESE R7-8, R11 BY ADV. SRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO R7-8, R11 BY ADV. SRI.S.A.ANAND R7-8, R11 BY ADV. SMT.K.N.REMYA R7-8, R11 BY ADV. SMT.L.ANNAPOORNA R7-8, R11 BY ADV. SHRI.VISHNU V.K. R7-8, R11 BY ADV. KUM.ABHIRAMI K. UDAY R1 & R3 SRI.T.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR, SR.GOVT.PLEADER R2 & R4 SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, PSC
THIS OP KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-12-2020, ALONG WITH OP(KAT).111/2020, THE COURT ON 21-12-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
-:7:-
J U D G M E N T
Dated this the 21st day of December, 2020
Shaffique, J.
The petitioners are applicants in OA (Ekm) Nos.2267/2018 and 260/2019 of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, who had applied for the post of Assistant Professor in various branches in the Technical Education Department. Annexure A16 is the ranked list published by KPSC with reference to the petitioners in OA(Ekm) No.2267/2018. The objection raised by the petitioners is with reference to a formula adopted in giving credit to academic marks. The specific contention is that credit points are awarded by different Universities in different formats. In respect of premium institutes like IIT and NIT, credit marks are given adopting a different formula. Therefore, the contention of the petitioners is that if a uniform formula is taken into consideration for the purpose of arriving at the marks based on credit points obtained in their academic career, it will render substantial injustice to persons like the petitioners.
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
-:8:-
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
-:9:-
cases is covered by the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Sajan N.Menon (supra). Paragraphs 8 and 9 are relevant, which reads as under:-
“8. Public Service Commission is a constitutional functionary and the duties and functions of the Commission have been laid down in Art.320 of the Constitution and they are: (1) to conduct examinations for appointments to the services of the State; (2) The Commission shall be consulted (a) on all matters relating to methods of recruitment to civil services and for civil posts, (b) on the principles to be followed in making appointments to civil services and posts and in making promotions and transfers from one service to another and on the suitability of candidates for such appointments, promotions, transfers. Public Service Commission follows the Kerala Public Service Commission Rules of Procedure in the matter of conducting selection to various posts in the State service. As we have already indicated, in accordance with R.11 (ii) read with cl.202 of the Kerala Public Service Commission Office Manual, P.S.C. follows a system of grading. By that system the basis of marking in respect of teaching posts in colleges (general as well as professional) shall be the percentage of marks for the written test plus credit for the percentage of academic marks upto a maximum of 50 plus interview marks out of 30. In respect of teaching posts in the colleges (general as well as professional) where the academic marks secured by the candidates also have to be reckoned for the purpose of ranking, the academic marks will be converted into proper grades and credit marks awarded. In the
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
-:10:-
grading system candidates who have got 85 and above will be graded as A+, 75 to 84-Grade A, 65 to 74-Grade B+, 55 to 64-Grade B, 45 to 54-Grade C+, 35 to 44-Grade C and below 35% if any,-Grade D. As only credit is given for the percentage of academic marks the sessional/internal assessment marks also would be reckoned. Such a method has been adopted for providing a common basis for selection of candidates and therefore vulnerability if any, between the various qualifying examinations can be met to a large extent thereby attaining equality.
9. Constitutional body like the P.S.C. invested with the task of selecting best suitable person for the post, has evolved a method which they believe would minimise the inequality between the candidates who have come out of qualifying examinations conducted by various Universities and Educational Institutions. The question is, in the absence of a better system suggested, whether the P.S.C. can be found fault with, in following the above-mentioned system which, to a large extent, though not fully, eliminates inequality. Courts sitting under Art.226 of the Constitution of India in such a situation would be slow to unsettle a process followed by P.S.C., which according to that expert body would bring the candidates to a common platform while testing their merits in the qualifying examinations. Such a method, in our view, cannot be termed as arbitrary and violative of Art.14 of the Constitution of India.”
No.442/2017 decided on 4/9/2019 ( KPSC v. Vineetha M.C. ) had
occasion to consider the basis of giving marks to give credit for
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
-:11:-
academic evaluation and after referring to the law laid down in Sajan N.Menon (supra), this Court considered the issue at paragraph 26, which reads as under:-
“26. Now, we will deal with the aforesaid contention regarding the alleged discriminatory treatment viz., treating unequals equally. The contention is that with the introduction of semester scheme marks were being given liberally as compared to the annual examination scheme and hence, treating them as one class in the matter of grant of credit for academic marks and applying the same grading system in that regard would violate Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Master's Degree in the concerned subject with not less than 50% marks from any of the Universities in Kerala or a qualification recognized as equivalent thereto by a University in Kerala is prescribed as a qualification for the posts in question. How can, in such circumstances, the fact that a candidate underwent PG course under annual scheme or semester scheme or the contention that comparatively marks are awarded liberally under the semester scheme, be a reason to contend that they do not belong to one class and treating them alike in the matter of grant of credit for academic marks is differential and discriminatory treatment. Treating persons possessing Master's Degree irrespective of the scheme under which they underwent the said course alike cannot be styled as arbitrary discrimination. A further classification among them on the ground that one particular scheme for acquiring the post graduation is allegedly easier when compared to the other cannot be a reason to treat them differently, taking into
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
-:12:-
account the purpose sought to be achieved. Therefore, it cannot be held as violative of either Article 14 or Article 16 of the Constitution of India. In fact, Circular No.17/2013 dated 16.8.2013 would reveal that the `basis of marking' was revised thereunder, virtually, taking into account such complaints. But, at the same time, we are of the considered view that on that reason no interference is invited with Circular No.17/2013 dated 16.8.2013 and also the basis of marking followed by the PSC in the selections involved in the cases on hand. Sajan N. Menon's case (supra) would reveal that this Court repelled the challenge against the 'basis of marking' wherein the weightage was given for academic marks based on a particular grading system, as can be seen from paragraphs 8 and 9 in that case. When 'basis of marking' as revealed from the said paragraphs was already given the stamp of approval by this Court, as can be seen from the decision in Sajan N. Menon's case, an interference with the selection for following such a 'basis of marking' in tune with Clause 339 of the PSC Manual is impermissible. In this context, it is also to be noted that the weightage for academic performance to be given in regard to the selection conducted by the PSC is virtually reduced by PSC subsequent to Sajan N. Menon's case. In other words, it is the case of the applicants themselves that earlier credit for academic marks based on the earlier circular was 'out of 50' and now it is 'out of 30'. The applicants cannot have, rather did not have, a contention that circular dated 19.12.1995 or 18.1.2011 is more favourable than the circular dated 16.8.2013. In view of the existence of such circulars the applicants cannot canvass the position that virtually there occurred an infraction of the procedure by introducing provision for awarding credit for
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
-:13:-
academic marks. Grant of credit to academic marks also cannot be taken as another test. As a matter of fact, it was in existence much earlier than all the notifications involved in these cases and Circular No.17/2013 dated 16.8.2013 is only one which carried out a re-fixation of the 'basis of marking'. The mere fact that the said circular dated 16.8.2013 was not followed while effecting selections pursuant to Annexures A6 & A8 notifications that culminated in Annexure-A7 and A9 ranked lists for appointments under Higher Secondary Education Department also cannot be a reason to interfere with the selections in question on that ground. In short, we do not find any reason to hold that the Division Bench of the Tribunal had committed any illegality or irregularity warranting an interference while repelling the challenge against the circular dated 16.8.2013 and consequently, in dismissing O.A.No.435 of 2018 relying on the decision of this Court in Sajan N. Menon's case (supra). In short, the order of the Tribunal in O.A.No.435 of 2018 calls for no interference in exercise of the power of judicial review.”
procedure adopted by different institutions while giving credit points to the students. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that as far as IIT and NIT are concerned, the points are given based on conversion of relative grading and conversion of such grades using a formula by KPSC will not give the desired result. But it is relevant to note that when KPSC has to take into account the academic background of a student, necessarily a
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
-:14:-
formula has to be arrived at and when such a formula is adopted, though it may not be fool proof, still it would render a method of evaluation. When all the candidates were considered based on the same yardstick, there cannot be any reason for any complaint. Hence, we do not think that the Tribunal had committed any error in the matter and there is no reason to interfere with the same.
OP(KAT)s are hence dismissed.
Sd/-
A.M.SHAFFIQUE
JUDGE
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
Rp
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
-:15:-
APPENDIX OF OP(KAT) 111/2020
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF OA(EKM)2267/2018 FILED BEFORE THE HON'BLE KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ALONG WITH THE ANNEXURE. EXHIBIT P1(A1) TRUE COPY OF THE GRADE SHEETS OF THE 1ST APPLICANT ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA. EXHIBIT P1(A1)(A) TRUE COPY OF THE PERCENTAGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 1ST APPLICANT BY THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA. EXHIBIT P1(A2) TRUE COPY OF THE CONSOLIDATED GRADE CARD ISSUED TO THE 2ND APPLICANT BY NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, CALICUT. EXHIBIT P1(A2)(A) TRUE COPY OF THE GOLD MEDAL CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 2ND APPLICANT BY NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, CALICUT. EXHIBIT P1(A2(B) TRUE COPY OF THE BONAFIDE STUDENT CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 2ND APPLICANT BY NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, CALICUT IS. EXHIBIT P1(A3) TRUE COPY OF THE GRADE CARD OF THE 3RD APPLICANT ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA.
EXHIBIT P1(A3(A) TRUE COPY OF THE M.TCH DEGREE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 3RD APPLICANT BY THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA.
EXHIBIT P1(A3(B) TRUE COPY OF THE PERCENTAGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 3RD APPLICANT BY THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA.
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
-:16:-
EXHIBIT P1(A4) TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION FOR CATEGORY NO.539/2014 OF 546/2014 PUBLISHED IN THE GAZETTE DATED 12.12.2014 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P1(A5) TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE RANKED LIST NO.62/13/SVII FOR THE POST OF LECTURER IN MECHANICAL ENGINEERING PUBLISHED WITH EFFECT FROM 18.02.2013 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P1(A6) TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED NIL SUBMITTED TO THE CHAIRMAN, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION. EXHIBIT P1(A7) TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 18.07.2018 SUBMITTED BY SRI.JAYESH BABU UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005. EXHIBIT P1(A8) TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 16.08.2018 SENT BY THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER IN THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P1(A9) TRUE COPY OF DECISION NO.3 DATED 18.06.2018 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P1(A10) TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.07/2017 DATED 03.06.2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P1(A11) TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.25/2020 DATED 20.10.2010 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P1(A12) TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT OF IIT BOMBAY. EXHIBIT P1(A13) TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 23.01.2015 ISSUED BY DEAN, ACADEMIC OF NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, WARANGAL.
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
-:17:-
EXHIBIT P1(A14) TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE RANKED LIST NO.636/18/SS VI FOR ASSISTANT PROFESSOR (CIVIL ENGINEERING) BROUGHT INTO FORCE WITH EFFECT FROM 06.09.2018. EXHIBIT P1(A15) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL DATED 31.10.2018 IN OA(EKM)1837/2018. EXHIBIT P1(A16) TRUE COPY OF THE RANK LIST NO.818/18/SSIV BROUGHT INTO FORCE WITH EFFECT FROM 22.11.2018. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN OA(EKM)2267/2018. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT FILED BY THE ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 5 AND 6 IN OA(EKM)2267/2018. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REJOINDER FILED BY THE APPLICANT IN OA(EKM)2267/2018 TO THE REPLY STATEMENT FILED BY THE ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 5 AND 6 ALONG WITH THE ANNEXURES. EXHIBIT P4(A17) TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 05.01.2019 SENT BY THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER IN THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST APPLICANT. EXHIBIT P4(A18) TRUE COPY OF THE ONLINE RTI REQUEST FORM FILED BY THE 1ST APPLICANT TO THE VISWESVARAYA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, NAGPUR. EXHIBIT P4(A19) TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NO.CPIO/RTIA/72/2018-19/114 SENT BY THE CENTRAL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, VISWESVARAYA NATION INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, NAJPUR.
-:18:-
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
EXHIBIT P4(A20) TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI. EXHIBIT P4(A21) TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION NO.NITTI/R/2018/50106 FILED BY THE 1ST APPLICANT TO NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI. EXHIBIT P4(A22) TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NO.NITT/RTI/2018-19/151 DATED 24.12.2018 SENT BY THE CENTRAL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF NOTE NO.AII(I) 10048/15/GW PLACED BEFORE THE ACADEMIC COMMITTEE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RECOMMENDATION DATED 20.12.2018 OF THE ACADEMIC COMMITTEE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL DATED 07.11.2019 IN OA(EKM)2267/2018.
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
-:19:-
APPENDIX OF OP(KAT) 112/2020
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF O.A.NO.260/2019 ALONG WITH ITS ANNEXURES.
EXHIBIT P1 (A1) TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION FOR CATEGORY NO.539/2014 TO 546/2014 PUBLISHED IN THE GAZETTE DATED 12.12.2014 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P1 (A2) TRUE COPY OF SHORT LIST FOR CAT NO.546/2014 DATED 29.01.2018 PUBLISHED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P1 (A3) TRUE COPY OF EXTRACT OF THE RANKED LIST NO.62/13/SVII FOR THE POST OF LECTURER IN MECHANICAL ENGINEERING PUBLISHED W.E.F.18.02.2013 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P1 (A4) TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED NIL SUBMITTED TO THE CHAIRMAN KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION. EXHIBIT P1 (A5) TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 18.07.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST APPLICANT UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT 2005.
EXHIBIT P1 (A6) TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 16.08.2018 SENT BY THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER IN THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST APPLICANT.
EXHIBIT P1 (A7) TRUE COPY OF DECISION NO.3 DATED 18.06.2018 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P1 (A8) TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.7/2017 DATED 03.06.2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
-:20:-
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
EXHIBIT P1 (A9) TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.25/2010 DATED 20.10.2010 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P1 (A10) TRUE COPY OF BONAFIDE STUDENT CERTIFICATE DATED 21.02.2018 ISSUED TO THE 1ST APPLICANT ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR ACADEMIC, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, CALICUT. EXHIBIT P1 (A11) TRUE COPY OF THE RANK CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 2ND APPLICANT BY THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR COURSES, INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, MADRAS. EXHIBIT P1 (A12) TRUE COPY OF BONAFIDE STUDENT CERTIFICATE DATED 23.02.2018 ISSUED TO THE 3RD APPLICANT BY THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR ACADEMIC, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, CALICUT. EXHIBIT P1 (A13) TRUE COPY OF TRANSCRIPT DATED 13.07.2011 ISSUED TO THE 4TH APPLICANT BY THE DEAN (ACADEMIC) NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI. EXHIBIT P1 (A14) TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE DATED 10.06.2011 RELATED TO CONVERSION FACTOR ISSUED BY THE DEAN (ACADEMIC) NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI. EXHIBIT P1 (A15) TRUE COPY OF BONAFIDE STUDENT CERTIFICATE DATED 19.02.2018 ISSUED TO THE 5TH APPLICANT BY THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR ACADEMIC, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, CALICUT. EXHIBIT P1 (A16) TRUE COPY OF GRADE CARD ISSUED TO THE 6TH APPLICANT BY THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (ACADEMIC) NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, ROURKELA.
-:21:-
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
EXHIBIT P1 (A17) TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE NO.NITR/AC/2012/263 DATED 19.01.2012 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (ACADEMIC) NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, ROURKELA. EXHIBIT P1 (A18) TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT OF IIT, BOMBAY. EXHIBIT P1 (A19) TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 23.01.2015 ISSUED BY DEAN ACADEMIC NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, WARANGAL. EXHIBIT P1 (A20) TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE RANKED LIST NO.636/18/SS VI FOR ASSISTANT PROFESSOR (CIVIL ENGINEERING) BROUGHT INTO FORCE W.E.F. 06.09.2018. EXHIBIT P1 (A21) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL DATED 31.10.2018 IN OA (EKM) 187/2018. EXHIBIT P1 (A22) NOTE NO.AII (I) 10048/15/GW PLACED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P1 (A23) TRUE COPY OF THE RECOMMENDATION DATED 20.12.2018 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P1 (A25) TRUE COPY OF THE RANKED LIST NO.141/19/SS VII FOR THE CATEGORY 546/2014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT W.E.F.27.02.2019. EXHIBIT P1 (A26) TRUE COPY OF THE RANKED LIST NO.142/19/SS IV FOR THE CATEGORY 540/2014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT W.E.F.27.02.2019. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF REPLY STATEMENT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ALONG WITH ITS ANNEXURES.
-:22:-
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF REPLY STATEMENT FILED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT ALONG WITH ITS ANNEXURES. EXHIBIT P3 (R6 A) TRUE COPY OF THE RANKED LIST NO.142/19/SS IV FOR CATEGORY NO.540/2014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT FILED BY RESPONDENTS 7 -10 ALONG WITH ITS ANNEXURES. EXHIBIT P4 (R7 (a)) TRUE COPY OF THE RANKED LIST PUBLISHED BY THE PSC TO THE POST OF ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING DATED 27.02.2019. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REJOINDER FILED BY THE APPLICANTS ALONG WITH ITS ANNEXURES. EXHIBIT P5 (A27) TRUE COPY OF THE CONSOLIDATED GRADE CARD OF THE 3RD APPLICANT ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF MA (EKM) NO.1916/2019 IN OA 2085/18, ALONG WITH AICTE REGULATIONS 2010. EXHIBIT P6 (A8) TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.7/2017 DATED 03.06.2017 ISSUED BY PSC. EXHIBIT P6 (A9) TRUE COPY OF THE FILE NOTING SHOWING THE DECISION DATED 18.06.2018 OF THE PSC ON THE REPORT OF THE EXPERT COMMITTEE. EXHIBIT P6 (A10) TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF F.ACD/PGU/M2/2018 DATED 23.02.2018 ISSUED BY INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (IIT), CHENNAI.
-:23:-
OP(KAT) Nos.111 & 112/2020
| EXHIBIT | P6 | (A11) | TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF DATED 10.06.2011 ISSUED BY NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (NIT), THIRUCHIRAPPALLI. |
|---|---|---|---|
| EXHIBIT | P6 | (A12) | TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF DATED 19.01.2012 ISSUED BY NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (NIT), ROURKELA. |
| EXHIBIT | P6 | (A13) | TRUE COPY OF RANKED LIST OF 62/13/SS VII IN RESPECT OF CATEGORY 143/2009 DATED 18.02.2013 PUBLISHED BY THE PSC FOR THE POST OF LECTURER MECHANICAL ENGINEERING IN TECHNICAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT. |
| EXHIBIT | P6 | (A14) | TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES OF ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION (PAY SCALES, SERVICE CONDITIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS FOR TEACHERS AND OTHER ACADEMIC STAFF IN TECHNICAL INSTITUTIONS (DEGREE) REGULATIONS 2010 ISSUED VIDE REFERENCE NO.F.NO.37- 3/LEGAL/2010 NEW DELHI DATED 22.01.2010) |
| EXHIBIT | P6 | (A15) | TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES OF ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION (PAY SCALES, SERVICE CONDITIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS FOR TEACHERS AND OTHER ACADEMIC STAFF IN TECHNICAL INSTITUTIONS (DEGREE) REGULATIONS 2019 PUBLISHED IN THE GAZETTE NOTIFICATION NO.82 DATED 01.03.2019. |
| EXHIBIT | P7 | ORDER DATED 07.11.2019 IN OA (EKM) 260/2019 OF THE KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (EKM BENCH) |
|
| EXHIBIT | P8 | TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT SHOWING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ABSOLUTE GRADING SYSTEM AND RELATIVE GRADING SYSTEM. |
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Kerala Public Service Commission's formula for converting diverse university credit points into academic marks violates Article 14 of the Constitution.
Whether treating candidates with different academic schemes (semester vs. annual) alike in the grant of credit for academic marks constitutes discriminatory treatment under Article 16.
Whether the Tribunal correctly upheld the PSC's grading system and rejected claims of injustice due to non-uniform university credit formats.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sajan N. Menon v. State of KeralaRelied on¶8
Sajan N.Menon v. State of Kerala (2007 (4) KLT 126)
K.P.S.C. v. Vineetha M.C.Applied¶26
KPSC v. Vineetha M.C., No.442/2017
5 provisions across 3 enactments
Vidhun.M
Jayesh Babu K.R.
State of Kerala
Kerala Public Service Commission
Director, Directorate of Technical Education
Mohammed Salih U.P.
A.M. Shaffique
Gopinath P.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
