IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 5TH APRIL 2010 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 5564 of 2010(U) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SUDHEESH S., S/O.SUBBAYYAN, AGED 22 YEARS, SUBISH BHAVAN, CHELIMADA, KUMILY P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.DAISY A.PHILIPOSE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE DISTRICT OFFICER, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, KATTAPPANA, IDUKKI. ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS,SC,KPSC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 5564 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of April, 2010 JUDGMENT The Kerala Public Service Commission invited applications for appointment to the post of Police Constable under the Kerala Armed Force 5th Battalion in the Police Department in Idukki and Kottayam Districts. The petitioner was an applicant for the said post. An OMR test was conducted on 6/9/08. The petitioner, who came out successful in the said test was included in the main list of the short list that was published on 13.3.2009. Thereafter, the certificate verification of the candidates included in the short list was conducted between 4.5.09 and 14.9.09 along with the Physical Efficiency Test. Accordingly, on 8.5.2009, the petitioner appeared before the competent officer for certificate verification and produced the required certificates. Ext.P5 is the ranked list published after certificate verification and Physical Efficiency Test. Admittedly, the petitioner has been included in Ext.P5 ranked list as Rank No.1289. The claim of the petitioner is that he is entitled to get additional weightage marks on account of his being a holder of NCC 'A', 'B' and 'C' certificates. W.P.(C) NO.5564/2010 2 If additional weightage marks based on those certificates are awarded, it would fetch him rank No.930 in Ext.P5, it is contended. Though he has submitted Ext.P6 representation, no action was taken thereon. It is mainly with the prayer for addition of weightage marks based on Exts.P1 to P3 N.C.C certificates and for consequential re-assignment of rank in Ext.P5 ranked list that this Writ Petition has been filed. 2. The respondent has filed an affidavit in this Writ Petition. According to the respondent, at the time of certificate verification on 8.5.2009, the petitioner had submitted only NCC 'C' certificate. Going by the usual practice, the Commission had only accepted the certificates produced by the candidates and attached them with their respective applications and in the case of the petitioner also the N.C.C 'C' certificate produced by him was accepted and attached to his application. In essence, the contention of the respondent is that the petitioner had not produced NCC 'A' and 'B' certificates at the time of certificate verification and, therefore, he is not entitled to the reliefs sought for in this Writ Petition. With respect to the denial of the additional weightage marks based on N.C.C 'C' certificate, it is stated in the counter affidavit that the last date W.P.(C) NO.5564/2010 3 for submission of application was 17.10.2007 and the N.C.C 'C' certificate (Ext.P3) produced by the petitioner would reveal that the examination was held only in 2008 and the said certificate was issued only on 10.6.2008. The said factual position with with respect to N.C.C 'C' certificate is not under dispute. Thus, the indisputable position would reveal that the petitioner had acquired the said qualification only after the last date of receipt of the application. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to the relief sought for based on N.C.C 'C' certificate. 3. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit. According to the petitioner, he had submitted N.C.C 'A', 'B' certificates along with N.C.C 'C' certificate at the time of certificate verification on 8.5.2009. According to the petitioner, the concerned officer, who verified the certificates retained the N.C.C 'C' certificate and returned N.C.C A' and 'B' certificates to the petitioner. The petitioner came to know that he was not actually granted weightage marks for being a holder of NCC 'A', 'B' and 'C' certificates only when Ext.P5 ranked list was published. He has submitted Ext.P6 representation dated 19.10.2009 before the respondent with a request to consider the aforementioned N.C.C certificates. In Ext.P6, it W.P.(C) NO.5564/2010 4 was stated that he had produced N.C.C 'A', 'B' and 'C' certificates before the concerned officer at the time of verification of documents. However, as already noticed, the claim of the petitioner relating production of N.C.C 'A' and 'B' certificates at the time of certificate verification has been specifically denied by the respondent and at the time it is specifically admitted thereunder that N.C.C 'C' certificate was produced by the petitioner at the time of certificate verification and the same was, in fact, duly accepted and attached to his application. The petitioner did not attribute mala fides on the respondent. There is absolutely no proof at all to show that N.C.C 'A' and 'B' certificates were produced by the petitioner before the respondent on 8.5.2009. The respondent admits the production of N.C.C 'C' certificate by the petitioner on that day and that was, in fact, attached to the petitioner's application. Ext.P6 would go to show that he had forwarded the N.C.C 'A and 'B' certificates along with it. But, in the absence of any proof to show that they were produced at the time of verification of documents, such documents produced after the publication of Ext.P5 list cannot be directed to be considered for the purpose of awarding additional weightage marks and re-assignment of rank in Ext.P5. In W.P.(C).No.12760/2009, this Court has held that the P.S.C is justified W.P.(C) NO.5564/2010 5 in rejecting the requests to take into account qualifications, certificates of which were never produced at the time of certificate verification process and which were produced after the finalisation of the ranked list. In the light of the aforesaid decision as also the decision of this Court in W.P.(C). Nos.2748/2009 and 4178/2007, I am of the view that the contentions of the petitioner cannot be upheld. In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is liable to fail and accordingly it is dismissed. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.5564/2010 6 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. W.P.(C). NO. /2010 JUDGMENT 3rd March, 2010 W.P.(C) NO.5564/2010 7