IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 18TH JULY 2008 / 27TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 21666 of 2008(D) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- ASHAKUMARI P. AJAY BHAVAN, PARAKODE P.O., ADOOR. BY ADV. SRI.S.KRISHNAKUMAR SMT.K.V.JAYANTHI RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE, GOVERMENT OF KERALA, GOVERMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERMENT, GOVERMENT OF KERALA, GOVERMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. DIRECTOR OF URBAN AFFAIRS, DIRECTORATE OF URBAN AFFAIRS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERMENT PLEADER SMT.M.R.SREELATHA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No.21666 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 18th July, 2008 J U D G M E N T The contentions raised by the petitioner for applying 3% reservation to the list published by the Public Service Commission for the post of Municipal Secretary on the culmination of general recruitment has been considered by me and rejected in Exhibit-P4 judgment (in so far as it relates to W.P (C) No.37825 of 2007). Public Service Commission has taken note of the judgment and as per Exhibit-P5 it replied stating that the petitioner was not advised for appointment as her turn for appointment did not arise as per the rules of reservation and rotation. Three percentage reservation should be granted to physically handicapped persons. But it need not be applied in the case of selection which has already been undertaken as part of the general recruitment. The notification issued by the Public Service Commission leading to Exhibit-P1 did not provide for 3% reservation W.P ( C) No.21666 of 2008 2 and it is therefore that I have in Exhibit-P4 judgment negated the contentions of the petitioner requiring the Government and the Commission to apply the ratio available for physically handicapped persons against the rank list published at the end of general recruitment undertaken by the Commission. In my view, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the same, her remedy is in relation to Exhibit-P4 judgment and not by way of filing a fresh writ petition. In the circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No.21666 of 2008 2 W.P ( C) No.21666 of 2008 2