IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 22ND MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 4775 of 2008(R) PETITIONERS: ---------------------- 1. ANITHA K.R., NALLAMPURATH HOUSE KEEZHILLAM P.O., ERNAKULAM. 2. MAYA V.V., VALIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE VIDAKUZHA, THAIKKATTUKARA P.O., ALWAYE-6. BY ADV. SRI.J.OM PRAKASH RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT OFFICER, P.S.C. ERNAKULAM. BY SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS- STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C)No.4775 of 2008 ------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of February, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioners applied for the post of L.D.Typist in Ernakulam pursuant to notification dated 31.12.2006. One of the qualifications for the said post is a pass in Computer Word Processing. As per the notification, the duration of the course of Computer Word Processing is not less than 3 months. Public Service Commission had also issued another notification declaring certain qualifications as equivalent to the prescribed qualification. Ext.P4 is such a notification. The course undergone by the petitioners is evidenced by Exts.P1 and P2. A perusal of Exts.P1 and P2 will show that the institutions, which have issued Exts.P1 and P2, are not among the enumerated institutions in Exts.P4 and P5. In the circumstances, I do not find any error in the stand taken by the Public Service Commission. Petitioners are not qualified in terms of Exts.P4 and P5. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy// P.S. To Judge