IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 25TH OCTOBER 2011 / 3RD KARTHIKA 1933 WA.No. 1282 of 2011() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN RP.875/2010 Dated 04/11/2011 & IN WP (C) NO.23259/2010 DATED 04/11/2010 .................... APPELLANT(S): REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN W.P.(C) ----------------------------------------------------- A.NAZARUDEEN, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.ABUZHAMAN PILLAI, RESIDING AT MARAKKATIL, KUNNUMPURATHU VEEDU, MUTHUVILA.P.O., KALLARA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.C.K.SHERIN SRI.RAJESH. K.RAJU RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 6 IN W.P.(C) -------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-01. 2. THE SECRETARY, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-14. 3. THE JOINT SECRETARY, DEPARTMENTAL TESTS OFFICE OF THE P.S.C., PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-14. 4. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF SCHEDULED CASTE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, AYYANKALI BHAVAN, KANAKANAGAR.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-33. 5. THE DISTRICT DEVELOPMENTAL OFFICER FOR SCHEDULED CASTE, KANAKANAGAR.P.O., AYYANKALI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-33. W.A.NO.1282/2011 6. THE JOINT DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF SCHEDULED CASTE DEVELOPMENT, KANAKANAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-33. MR.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC FOR PSC MR.GEORGE MECHERIL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, Ag.CJ. & P.S.GOPINATHAN, J. .................................................................... W.A. No.1282 of 2011 .................................................................... Dated this the 25th day of October, 2011. J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair, Ag.CJ. The appellant filed WP(C) for a direction to the PSC to revalue his answer book in one paper, which the appellant wrote 3 times and failed. The learned Single Judge found no merit in the claim, more so because the Regulation did not provide for any revaluation of answer book got valued by the PSC. The appellant has not demonstrated as to how the valuation done by the PSC is wrong and he has no case that there is any bias against him by anybody. So much so we do not find any ground to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, we dismiss the Writ Appeal. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) (P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE) jg