IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2010 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 36686 of 2010(I) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ CHITHRA N., 'SOUPARNIKA'. 301, PRASANTH NAGAR, ULLOOR, MEDICAL COLLEGE(P.O) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 011 BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J., SMT.POOJA SURENDRAN. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. 2. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM PALACE(P.O.)THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004. 3. THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY REP.BY ITS REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, ATHIRAMPUZHA (P.O.), KOTTAYAM, PIN-686 560. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.P.N. SANTHOSH. R2 BY ADV. MR.ALEXANDER THOMAS, SC, KPSC. R3 BY ADV.MR.T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G. UNIVERSITY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/12/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P (C) No.36686 of 2010 -------------------------- Dated this the 17th December, 2010 J U D G M E N T Pursuant to Ext.P1 notification issued by the second respondent for the post of Lecturer in Micro-Biology in the Kerala Collegiate Education Service, petitioner submitted her application. She appeared for the written test and interview. However, at the stage of verification of certificates, she was required to produce an equivalency certificate from the third respondent University. 2. Petitioner immediately made Ext.P4 application to the University. However, the University has not so far passed any order. In the meantime, petitioner apprehends that alleging delay in the production of equivalency certificate, second respondent will take steps for rejection of her application. It is with this grievance, the writ petition has been filed seeking appropriate directions for passing order on Ext.P4 and to require the second respondent not to reject her application in the meanwhile. 3. Learned standing counsel appearing for the W.P (C) No.36686 of 2010 2 third respondent submits that Ext.P4 application will have to be considered by the Academic Council and that steps will be taken for the expeditious consideration of the application. 4. Therefore, Ext.P4 application will have to be considered by the Academic Council and having regard to the nature of the urgency pointed out by the petitioner, necessarily the Academic Council should consider the application in its next meeting itself. Now that the request of the petitioner for equivalency certificate is pending consideration of the Academic Council of the University, I feel the second respondent should not reject the application of the petitioner in the meanwhile. Therefore, the second respondent is directed not to reject the application until the Academic Council considers Ext.P4 and passes an order thereon. 5. It is directed that once the Academic Council of the third respondent takes a decision on Ext.P4, third respondent will also communicate the decision to the second respondent so that the second respondent can take W.P (C) No.36686 of 2010 3 further action in the matter, without any delay. Petitioner to produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the respondents 2 and 3 for compliance. Writ petition is disposed. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE ma /True copy/ P.A to Judge