IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 28TH JUNE 2011 / 7TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 10329 of 2011(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- PRAKASAN.B., AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, RESERVE DRIVER, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, KOLLAM DEPOT., RESIDING AT PUTHOOR KIZHAKKETHIL HOUSE, KUREEPPUZHA, KAVALADU (P.O.), KOLLAM (DIST.). BY ADV. SMT.G.VIDYA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM, TRIVANDRUM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, TRIVANDRUM. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 3. THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, KPSC FOR R1 V.V. NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR SC,KSRTC FOR R2 AND R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/06/2011 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 10329 of 2011(M) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT DT.1.7.2000 EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS DT.14.9.2010 RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE jma C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 10329 OF 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 28th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is working as a Reserve Driver under the 3rd respondent, Kerala State Road Transport Corporation. In a rank list published by the Kerala Public Service Commission for appointment of Drivers under the Corporation the petitioner holds rank No.3503. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has not been given the extra marks awardable to meritorious Sportsmen who possess the requisite qualifications and are within the age, in selections to Class III and Class IV posts. According to him, if extra marks in terms of the relevant orders were awarded to him it would have fetched him higher rank in the said list. In the said circumstances, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P2 representation requesting the respondents to award extra marks taking into all his meritorious achievements in sports. It is the delay in the matter of its consideration that compelled the petitioner to file this writ petition. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, WPC.No. 10329/2011 : 2 : the learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala Public Service Commission and the learned Standing counsel for the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation. The learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent submitted that extra marks would be awarded to meritorious sportsmen who possess the requisite qualifications and are within age, in selection to Class III and Class IV posts in terms of G.O (MS)No.21/78/ GAD dated 11.1.1978. However, to avail the said benefit it is mandatory to produce the sports certificate issued by the authorities mentioned in Paragraph 5 of the aforesaid Government Order and the same has to be countersigned by the Secretary of the Kerala Sports Council. Evidently, the petitioner has not produced any such documents in this case. Even if, such a certificate was produced it could not have and would not have earned him any benefit as claimed because the provision for awarding extra marks, in terms of the said Government Order, is applicable only in the case of direct recruitment and that too, in respect of recruitment to certain specified categories in Government Services. In other words, it is inapplicable for direct recruitments to various posts under WPC.No. 10329/2011 : 3 : the Corporation. The petitioner could not produce any material to show existence of any provision for awarding such extra marks in the matter of selection of direct recruitments to the concerned post under the Corporation. In the absence of any such material the petitioner cannot as a matter of right claim that he should have been awarded extra marks in the matter of the selection in question. No provision or order was brought to my notice by the petitioner to substantiate his claim. In the circumstances, the claim and contentions of the petitioner cannot be upheld. There is no merit in this writ petition. Accordingly, this writ petition is closed. Sd/- (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge