IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2009 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 32339 of 2007(Y) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- GOPALAKRISHNAKURUKKAL, PUTHAN MADOM, KURA P.O., KURA, CHENGAMANADU (VIA), KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY MR.P.RAVINDRAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. 3. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. R1 BY MR.ALEXANDER THOMAS, SC,KPSC, R2 & R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. M.R. SREELATHA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/10/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.32339/2007-Y: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE PSC DTD. 14/11/05. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE ADMISSION TICKET. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE DETAIL OF THE MARKS OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER IN THE WRITTEN TEST WAS AVAILABLE FROM THE WEB SITE OF THE R.1. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE SHORT LIST DTD. 30/03/2007. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE RANKED LIST OF HSS TEACHERS POLITICAL SCIENCE JUNIOR PUBLISHED EFFECTIVE FROM 05/09/2007. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE RANKED LIST ISSUED BY THE PSC OF HSS TEACHERS SENIOR POLITICAL SCIENCE PUBLISHED EFFECTIVE FROM 30/04/2007. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.32339/2007-Y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 28th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is an applicant to the post of H.S.S.T (Political Science) (Junior). Ext.P1 is the copy of the notification. The petitioner appeared for the written test, on getting intimation. 2. It is averred in the writ petition that he secured 43 marks in the written test going by the details furnished by the first respondent in the web site. The petitioner was called for interview. It is the case of the petitioner that only persons who obtained 47 marks were alone called for interview. Accordingly, it is contended that in the notification and Ext.P2-admission ticket the Commission had not mentioned the fixing of the cut off marks as eligibility for being called for the interview. In the short list 49 names were included in the main list and 127 names in supplementary list and later a ranked list was published in which 49 names were included in the main list and 98 names in supplementary list. 2. The main contention raised in the writ petition is that the P.S.C has no authority to fix cut off marks in the examination for qualifying for the interview. The first respondent has filed an affidavit in the matter. W.P.(C). No.32339/2007 -:2:- 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the light of the directions issued by this Court in W.P.(C).No.7110/2007 and connected cases, a similar direction can be issued in this case also. It is pointed out that the decision of the Full Bench in Ravidas v. Public Service Commission [2009 (2) KLT 295 (F.B)], it was declared that in the absence of any provision in the Rules or in the Notification, the Commission is not empowered to fix a cut off mark. In W.P.(C).No.7110/2007 and connected cases, this Court directed the petitioners therein to file appropriate representation before the Secretary of the P.S.C regarding the claims in respect of the respective notifications and the objections therein in regard to the methods adopted by the P.S.C. and thereafter the Commission to offer a hearing in the matter. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:- i. The petitioner will file appropriate representation before the Secretary of P.S.C regarding the claims in respect of the notification and the objections therein in regard to the methods adopted by the P.S.C. The same shall be filed within a period of one month from today. W.P.(C). No.32339/2007 -:3:- ii. The petitioner will produce the materials he relies upon along with the representation to be filed. The petitioner will be granted a personal hearing in the matter. The hearing can be conducted by the Secretary himself or by any other Senior Officer authorised for that purpose by the Secretary. After considering the claims and objections raised by the petitioner, the matter will be considered in the light of the directions issued by the Full Bench and the legal position declared thereon within a further period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the representation. 4. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the matter. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms