IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 17TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 27896 of 2011(J) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ SATHISH KUMAR. N., NIRAVATH, VALAYANCHIRANGARA. P.O., PERUMBAVOOR-683 556. BY ADV. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY, SMT.N.SANTHA, SRI.K.A.BALAN, SRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO, SRI.S.A.ANAND. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004. 2. ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER, PERUMBAVOOR-683 542. 3. K.O. JOY, ADVOCATE, EDITOR, "UPABHOKTHRUNEETHI LAW MAGAZINE", VADAKKANETHIL TOWER, PERUMBAVOOR-683 542. R1 BY ADV. MR.P.C. SASIDHARAN, SC, KPSC. R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.LIJU STEPHEN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/11/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 27896 of 2011(J) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE NOTIFICATION IN THE KERALA GAZETTED DATED 14-1-2008 INVITED APPLICATIONS FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE POST OF ASSISTANT INFORMATION OFFICER IN THE INFORMATION AND PUBLIC RELATIONS DEPARTMENT. EXT.P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATE DATED 11-11-1998 TO THE PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE UPABHOKTHRUNEETHI LAW MAGAZINE, VADAKKANETHIL TOWER, PERUMBVOOR. EXT.P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.GRVIII(1) 26959/07/GW DATED 18-8-2011 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATE DATED 01-3-2011. EXT.P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE NO.HTPL/CHN/105/290811 DATED 29-8-2011 ISSUED BY HYKON TRANSCRIPTS (P) LTD. EXT.P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE DECLARATION. EXT.P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.GRVIII (1) 26959/07/GW DATED 3-09-2011 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF EXPERIENCE DATED 24-8-2011. EXT.P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 4-4-2011 IN WPC.NO.7587/2011-W OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J --------------------------------------------- W.P.(c)No.27896 of 2011 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of November 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner, an applicant for selection and appointment to the post of Assistant Information Officer, pursuant to Ext.P1 notification issued by the Kerala Public Service Commission ('PSC' for short), has filed this writ petition complaining that the certificate produced by him has not been accepted by the PSC. As per Ext.P1 notification, the Experience Certificate produced by each candidate has to be counter signed by the officer who is authorised to inspect the registers maintained by the employer in accordance with the statute. In Ext.P8 certificate produced by the petitioner, the officer concerned made an endorsement that since the establishment in which the petitioner had worked was closed down in the year 2003, he had not verified the records of the said establishment. The counsel for the petitioner places reliance on Ext.P9 judgment of this WPC No.27896/2011 2 Court in the case of a similar candidate where this Court has directed the officer to conduct an enquiry to find out whether the petitioner therein had actually worked in the establishment and to countersign the experience certificate on the basis of such an enquiry. 2. The standing counsel for PSC submits that Ext.P1 notification specifies the manner in which the endorsement and counter signature of the officer has to be made and therefore, any certificate that does not satisfy the said requirements would not be accepted. It is also necessary that such certificate is to be produced within the time stipulated by the PSC. 3. I notice from Ext.P8 that since the establishment in which the petitioner had worked had been closed down in 2003, he could not verify the records thereof to ascertain whether the petitioner had actually worked there. The situation in which Ext.P9 judgment has been rendered also related to a candidate in similar circumstances. This Court has held that the second respondent herein, who is the officer authorised to countersign the petitioner's certificate, has to conduct an WPC No.27896/2011 3 enquiry as to whether the petitioner had actually worked in the establishment during the period that is mentioned in Ext.P8 certificate and to countersign the same. I extract the direction in Ext.P9 which is as follows: The 2nd respondent shall conduct an enquiry with the employer and the establishment and ascertain whether the petitioner had actually worked in the workshop during the period covered by Exts.P2 and P3. Such enquiry need not be necessarily be based on the records maintained by the employer if they are not now available. It can also be based on information collected by oral enquiry with the employer as well as other employees of the workshop or persons residing nearby. The same shall be done and if it is found on such enquiry that the petitioner had in fact worked in the said workshop during the period stated in Exts.P2 and P3, the 2nd respondent shall countersign the same, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the petitioner produces such a countersigned certificate before the Ist respondent within one month, the same would be accepted as one produced within time and the candidature of the petitioner shall be processed accordingly by the P.S.C. The counsel for the petitioner submits that he has also got a contention that the prescription regarding countersignature may be left open to be agitated later if necessary. Accordingly that contention is left open. But that does not mean that, I have considered that contention on merits.” 4. The petitioner is also entitled to a similar direction. WPC No.27896/2011 4 5. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of the above direction. The petitioner shall produce such certificate before the PSC within one month from today. Sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE css/ true copy P.S.TO JUDGE