IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2009 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 34773 of 2009(N) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- VINOD KUMAR B., HSA (MATHS), KAIKOTHU BADAV VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, RESIDING AT ERIAM P.O., M.M.BAZAR VIA, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY MR.M.SASINDRAN, ADVOCATE. MR.V.VENUGOPAL, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVCICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, THRIUVANANTHAPURAM. BY MR.ALEXANDER THOMAS,SC,KPSC FOR R1. MR.T.T. MUHAMOOD, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.34773 OF 2009 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of December, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein who is presently working as H.S.A (Maths) is aggrieved by the awarding of lower marks to him in the written test conducted for appointment to the post of District Educational Officer in the Department Quota. It is the contention of the petitioner that if his answer script is valued properly, his register number should have been figured in the short list of the Department Quota candidates. The petitioner has sought for a direction to the 1st respondent to produce the petitioner's answer script for main examination to the post of District Educational Officer and to direct it to be valued by a competent person. 2. Learned Standing Counsel for the Public Service Commission submitted that there is no provision for revaluation under the guidelines issued by the P.S.C in the matter. The remedy of the petitioner is only to submit an application for rechecking within a period of 30 days of the date of publication of W.P.(C) No.34773/2009 2 the mark list that too by making a valid application with requisite fee. The candidate cannot seek for revaluation in the absence of any provision. The issue is covered against the petitioner in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in Pramod Kumar Srivastava vs. Chairman, Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna & others (2004 (6) SCC 714). Therefore, the prayers made by the petitioner seeking revaluation cannot be granted obviously. Even though the request of the petitioner for revaluation is refused, if the petitioner submits an application for rechecking in accordance with the Rules, the same will be considered by the Public Service Commission. No costs. This writ petition is disposed of as above. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp