IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2010 / 18TH POUSHA 1931 WA.No. 1382 of 2004() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.20583/2004 Dated 13/07/2004 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ C.FACIL, PEON, SREE NILAKANTA GOVERNMENT SANSKRIT COLLEGE, PATTAMBI. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.SUDHAKARA PRASAD, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH SRI.NAVEEN.T RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT OFFICER, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, DISTRICT OFFICE, PALAKKAD. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS,SC,KPSC FOR R1 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.R.BINDU. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08.01.2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- W.A. No.1382 OF 2004 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 8th January, 2010. J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The appellant is the petitioner. He challenged Ext.P6 notice issued by the Public Service Commission on 1.7.2004. According to him, the PSC has already taken a decision and what is issued, cannot be treated as a notice. The learned Single Judge held that Ext.P6 is only a notice and the appellant can place all his contentions before the Public Service Commission, in which event, the PSC will consider the same on merits and take a decision giving reasons. Challenging that judgment, this writ appeal is preferred. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the notice has been issued after the lapse of the time limit prescribed in Rule 3(c) of K.S. & S.S.R. The advice cannot be cancelled after the time limit contained in the said rule. It is also submitted that the said position is settled by several decisions of this Court. We think these are all matters for the appellant to raise before the PSC. At the first instance, the PSC has to take a decision on those contentions. Therefore, the view taken by the WA NO.1382/04 2 learned Single Judge is unassailable. Accordingly, the writ appeal fails and it is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE. tgs K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- W.A. No.1382 OF 2004 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 8th January, 2010.