IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 6TH AUGUST 2010 / 15TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 24652 of 2010(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SUMAKUMARI R.S, MANKALA VADAKKATHU VEEDU, KANJIRAMKULAM PO,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 6 95524. BY ADV. SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR SMT.HENA BAHULEYAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT OFFICER, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION DISTRICT OFFICE P.S.C ,PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. MR.ARAVIND KUMAR BABU, GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.ALEXANDER THOMAS, SC FOR PSC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.24652 of 2010 (F) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 6th day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner was a candidate, who had applied in response to a notification issued by the Public Service Commission for recruitment to the post of Clerk/Typist. The petitioner submitted her application and was included in Ext.P1 supplementary ranked list for Latin Catholic candidates at serial No.4. The ranked list expired on 05/05/2006. During the currency of the ranked list, the petitioner approached this Court by filing WP(C) No.11954/2006 seeking advice and appointment. In that writ petition, Ext.P2 interim order was passed by this Court on 28/04/2006 directing reporting of substantive vacancies. The Public Service Commission had filed Ext.P4 counter affidavit stating that all candidates were advised against the vacancies reported. When that writ petition was finally came up for hearing, by Ext.P3 judgment rendered on 14/06/2007, the case was closed as infructuous. 2. It would appear that subsequent to the dismissal of the WP(C) No.24652/2010 -2- writ petition, repeated applications were made either by the petitioner or on her behalf, under the provisions of the Right to Information Act seeking disclosure of various informations pertaining to the vacancies reported and the candidates advised from Ext.P1 ranked list. 3. The petitioner now contends that during the currency of the ranked list, 188 vacancies were reported and that if candidates were properly advised applying the Rules of reservation, she should have been advised for appointment. On this allegation, she filed Ext.P9 representation to the Chairman of the PSC and the representation is seen to have acknowledged by Ext.P10. In this writ petition, what the petitioner seeks is a direction that she be appointed to one of the vacancies reserved. In my view, this prayer made by the petitioner is unsustainable. This is primarily for the reason that she had already approached this Court by filing WP(C) No.11954/2006 and that writ petition was closed by this Court as infructuous as per Ext.P3 judgment. Once the writ petition filed for advice and appointment was closed as infructuous, the petitioner cannot be permitted to file WP(C) No.24652/2010 -3- successive writ petitions claiming appointment based on her inclusion in Ext.P1 ranked list. This is all the more so since the ranked list has expired way back in 2006. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg