IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2010 / 27TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 32751 of 2009(L) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. KALADHARAN, S/O. P.A. KITTA, AGED 50 YEARS, PUTHILATH HOUSE, VAZHUVACODE, PATTANCHERRY.P.O, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. PUSHPALATHA.K.N, W/O. RAMANKUTTY, AGED 46 YEARS, PONNETH HOUSE, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD. 3. PAZHANIKUTTY, S/O. MAYAN, AGED 44 YEARS, CHANDANAPURAM, CHITTUR.P.O, PALAKKAD. 4. P.P. RUGMINI, W/O. PADMANABHAN, AGED 49 YEARS, PAZHAYA PISHARAM, KARKAIDAMKUNNU.P.O, ALANALLUR VIA. 5. V. SASIKALA, W/O. K. RAJARATNAM, AYYAPPA LINES, THEKKEPARAMBU, PUTHUPARIYARAM.P.O, PALAKKAD. 6. R. PRASANNAKUMARI, D/O. RAMAN, AGED 40 YEARS, ELAYAPURACKAL, THAMARAKULAM, VADAKKANTHARA.P.O, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.VENKETESH W.P. (C) NO.32751/2009 RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD. 3. CHIEF EMPLOYMENT OFFICER, DISTRICT EMPLOYMENT OFFICE, PALAKKAD. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.32751/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CARD NO.5166/77 OF IST PETITIONER. P2:- COPY OF THE CALL LETTER FOR INTERVIEW RECEIVED BY IST PETITIONER. P3:- COPY OF THE SELECT LIST PREPARED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P4:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD. 17.5.10 FROM THE PUBLICE INFORMATION OFFICER. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.32751 OF 2009 (L) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioners are unemployed persons who had registration with the 3rd respondent. In pursuance to the requisition made by the 2nd respondent for filling up the vacancies in the post of menial staff, candidates including the petitioners were sponsored. Among the sponsored candidates, second respondent selected some of them and the selected candidates were appointed. Grievance of the petitioners is that those selected are younger in age and junior to them. In my view, in a process of selection, when merit is assessed, there is nothing unnatural for a junior or a younger person getting selected over senior or older person. Therefore this itself will not vitiate the process of selection. 2. Petitioners contended that there are two more vacancies of menial staff and therefore they should be appointed to that vacancies. As rightly pointed out by the Government Pleader, if there are two vacancies and if those vacancies are reported, it is for the 3rd respondent to sponsor candidates and from among those sponsored, it is for the 2nd respondent to select WPC.No. 32751/2009 :2 : the best among them. Therefore the direction sought by the petitioners to appoint them cannot be granted. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/