IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH APRIL 2008 / 20TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 12193 of 2008(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ GEETHA N., W/O. ACHUTHA KUMAR, RESIDING AT AVINJIKKAD HOUSE,RISHINARDHAMANGALAM, KANNAMBRA P.O., PALAKKAD-678 686. BY ADV. SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH (SR.) SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON SRI.JIBU P THOMAS SRI.P.S.APPU RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT OFFICER, DISTRICT OFFICE, PALAKKAD. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, PALAKKAD. BY SC, PSC, SRI. ALEXANDER THOMAS GP. SRI. A.J. VARGHESE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No. 12193 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 9th day of April, 2008. = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = = = = J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a person who has joined service pursuant to the advice made by the Public Service Commission from a rank list prepared by the Commission in which the petitioner was also included. Now Ext.P5 show cause notice has been issued to the petitioner stating that the Commission has provisionally decided to cancel the advice of the petitioner and directing the petitioner to show cause why the same should not be done. The petitioner's contention is that Ext.P5 does not disclose the reasons for the decision of the Commission except the foot note that there was a mistake while computing communal rotation without stating to what the mistake was. The petitioner submits that without knowing the reasons for which the petitioners advice is sought to be cancelled he cannot effectively reply to Ext.P5 notice. 2. I have heard the learned standing counsel for the 1st respondent and the learned Government pleader. W.P.(C).No. 12193 OF 2008 2 3. The learned standing counsel for the 1st respondent seeks time to get instructions. I am of the opinion that for disposing of this case it is not necessary to get further instructions in so far as Ext.P5 does not give the grounds on which the petitioner's advice is sought to be cancelled. Without such reasons also being mentioned in Ext.P5, the petitioner cannot effectively reply to Ext.P5. Principles of natural justice requires that the petitioner be supplied with those reasons before proceeding further. 4. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the 1st respondent that Ext.P5 shall be proceeded with only after issuing a detailed communication to the petitioner explaining the reasons for which the advice is sought to be cancelled including the details of the mistake mentioned in Ext.P5. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition along with a certified copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent for compliance. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE bkn/-