IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 19643 of 2008(L) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- ABDULLA P.V., PALLATHIL VADAKKE THODUVIL, NELLIKKUTHU P.O., MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN SMT.DHANYA P.ASHOKAN SRI.GILBERT GEORGE CORREYA SRI.NISHIL.P.S. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004. 2. THE DISTRICT OFFICER, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, DISTRICT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, NEW BLOCK, MALAPPURAM 676 505. 3. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS,SC,KPSC FOR R1,2 SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB FOR R3 SRI. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/10/2008, THE COURT ON 24/11/2008 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.Ravindran, J. ===================== W.P(C).No.19643 of 2008 ===================== Dated this the 24th day of November, 2008. JUDGMENT By Ext.P1 notification published in the Kerala Gazette Extraordinary dated 17.5.2006, the Kerala Public Service Commission, hereinafter referred to as the “Commission” for short, invited applications from eligible persons for appointment as Electricity Worker (Mazdoor) in the Kerala State Electricity Board, hereinafter referred to as the “Board” for short. The qualifications prescribed by the Board for the post of Electricity Worker (Mazdoor) and set out in Ext.P1 are as follows: “(1) Candidates should have passed Std. IV and should not have passed Std.X. (2) Knowlewdge of cycling. (3) Physical Standards: (a) Minimum Height : 5' 2” (157.48 Csm.) (b) Vision : Normal (free from colour blindness)” 2. The petitioner applied pursuant to Ext.P1 notification for appointment in Malappuram District. He was called to appear for the written test held on 6.1.2007. Based on his performance in the written test he was included in the short list prepared by the Commission on 5.12.2007. Thereafter, the petitioner appeared for the physical test and verification of certificates on 15.12.2007 at Government College, Malappuram. At the time of verification of certificates, the petitioner WP(C) No.19643/08 -: 2 :- produced Ext.P3 certificate issued by the Eye Specialist attached to District Hospital, Manjeri in the form prescribed by the Commission. In Ext.P3, the Eye Specialist attached to the District Hospital, Manjeri had certified that the visual acuity of the petitioner is 6/9 and 6/6. The Eye Specialist had also certified that the petitioner is free from colour blindness. When the ranked list was published on 30.1.2008, the petitioner's name was not included therein. According to the petitioner, when he made enquiries regarding the non-inclusion of his name in the ranked list he was informed that as he did not have normal vision in one eye without glasses, his name was not included in the ranked list. In this Writ Petition, the petitioner challenges the non-inclusion of his name in the ranked list published by the Commission on 30.1.2008 and prays for the following reliefs: “(i) To issue a writ of mandamus, order or appropriate direction commanding and compelling the respondents 1 and 2 to include the name of the petitioner in the Ranked list prepared by the 2nd respondent for appointment to the post of Electricity Worker (Mazdoor) in Malappuram District; (ii) To declare that Ext.P3 Medical Certificate satisfy the stipulation as to normal vision notified by the respondents in Ext.P1; (iii) To declare that the 2nd respondent cannot insist for absolute precision with reference to visual acuity but only normal vision for appointment to the post of Electricity WP(C) No.19643/08 -: 3 :- Worker (Mazdoor);” 3. Respondents 1 and 2 have filed a counter affidavit stating that the name of the petitioner was not included in the ranked list as he did not have normal vision without glasses and that the applications of all such candidates were rejected. As the petitioner does not have normal vision without glasses, he is not eligible to apply for the post, it is contended. Respondents 1 and 2 have in the counter affidavit also set out the duties and functions of Electricity Workers. They are as follows: “1. Assist 11 KV/LT line route scury . 2. Convey 11 KV/LT line material including all kinds of line support and all tools and accessories to the worksite under supervision. 3. Load 11 KV/LT line materials support, UG cables, transformers and allied equipments, meters, tools and accessories in to Department/ Private vehicles from Stores/Section offices/such other locations specified by the superiors and to unload and stacking them carefully and properly at the locations decided by superiors. 4. Do the complete works connected with distributions and dismantling of 11 KV/LT line including erection of transformer and accessories under supervision. 5. Carry out complete U G 11 KV/LT cable laying and allied works relating to excavation of cable trench, spreading of river sand laying of bricks etc. including digging out old 11 KV cable when required under supervision. WP(C) No.19643/08 -: 4 :- 6. Carry out the works of dismantling of service connections. 7. Install street light at locations specified by the superior office. 8. Cutting and removing all the under grown and overhanging of trees, shrubs etc., across 11 KV/LT lines under supervision. 9. Scrape and paint transformers structures, metal parts, number the posts, number the trees proposed to be cut and removed, plant traffic signals in line supports, paint line supports and other similar works under supervision. 10. Assist in the repair and maintenance of 11 KV/LT lines transformer 11 KV/LT structures, street lights, tools, plant and other accessories. 11. Clean the transformer/11KV switch under supervision. 12. Assist the work effecting all sorts of WP and OH and HT service connections. 13. Stack the materials neatly at the Section store/ Circle store as per directions of superiors. 14. Report the superiors regarding fault in the LT 11 KV line or any misuse/tampering of Boards property if noticed to the superiors promptly.” 4. Respondents 1 and 2 contend that if candidates without normal vision are appointed, it will affect the efficacy of the Board since the duties which the Electricity Worker are required to perform involve precision and accuracy. The Board has filed a counter affidavit contending inter alia that women and physically handicapped persons are WP(C) No.19643/08 -: 5 :- not eligible for appointment as Electricity Worker (Mazdoor) except where such appointments are in the 5% quota reserved for contingent workers having not less than 3 years service in the Board or under the scheme for compassionate appointment. The Board has however not chosen to state whether the qualification prescribed by it in Annexure R3(a) order is normal vision with or without glasses. 5. I have heard Sri.P.K.Vijayamohanan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri. Alexander Thomas, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Commission and Sri.K.S.Anil, the learned Standing Counsel for appearing for the Board. The short question that arises for consideration is whether the stipulation in Ext.R3(a) Board Order dated 15.7.1998 that applicants for the post of Electricity Worker (Mazdoor) should have normal vision free from colour blindness has to be understood as normal vision without glasses as contended by the Commission. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that what is prescribed by the Board in Ext.R3(a) Board Order is that the applicant should have normal vision free from colour blindness and that in the absence of a stipulation by the Board that the applicant should have normal vision without glasses, the Commission was not entitled to find the petitioner ineligible to hold the post. The learned counsel for the petitioner brought to my notice the provisions in the Special Rules prescribing the qualifications for appointment to the post of Armed Police Sub Inspector in the Kerala Police Subordinate Service, Finger Print WP(C) No.19643/08 -: 6 :- Searchers in the Finger Print Bureau of the Police Department and Warder in Jail Subordinate Service wherein it is stipulated that the applicant should have normal vision without glasses and contended that unless the appointing authority prescribes normal vision without glasses as the qualification, the Commission cannot on its own impose such a condition and eliminate candidates having normal vision with glasses from the field of choice. 6. In the instant case, the Board does not contend that the applicants should have normal vision without glasses. The Board has in Ext.R3(a) order while prescribing the qualifications for the post of Electricity Worker (Mazdoor) stated that it is issued with the concurrence of the Commission. The Commission did not at the point of time when it was consulted and its concurrence sought stipulate or insist that the applicants should have normal vision without glasses. The stand now taken by the Commission is that normal vision means normal vision without glasses and therefore, the petitioner is not eligible. In my opinion, the stand taken by the Commission is plainly untenable. Ext.R3 (a) Board order which prescribes the qualifications for the post of Electricity Worker (Mazdoor) does not stipulate that the applicant should have normal vision without glasses. In the instant case, the visual acuity of the petitioner is 6/9 and 6/6 without glasses and 6/6 in both eyes with glasses. The petitioner is also free from colour blindness. In the absence of any stipulation in Ext.R3(a) Board order that the applicant WP(C) No.19643/08 -: 7 :- should have normal vision without glasses, the Commission was not justified in insisting that the applicants should have normal vision without glasses. 7. In the Special Rules prescribing the method of appointment and qualifications for the post of Armed Police Sub Inspector in the Kerala Police Subordinate Service, the Government have prescribed that the applicant should possess normal vision without glasses. In the case of Finger Print Searcher in the Finger Print Bureau of the Police Department, the Government have prescribed that the applicant should have normal vision without glasses. For appointment to the post of Warder in the Jail Subordinate Service also, the applicant must possess normal vision without glasses. In the case of Sergeant also, the visual standard prescribed is without glasses. In the case of Deputy Superintendent of Police in the Kerala Police Service, the visual standard is with or without glasses. The Commission appears to have proceeded on the basis that as the petitioner has to wear glasses to correct the vision in one eye, he does not have normal vision and therefore, he is ineligible to hold the post of Electricity Worker (Mazdoor). The Commission appears to have proceeded to examine whether by medical standards the petitioner has normal vision. In my opinion, it is not what the Board intended when it prescribed the qualifications in Ext.R3(a) Board order in consultation with the Commission and with its concurrence. All that the Board has prescribed is that the candidates should have normal vision. The Board WP(C) No.19643/08 -: 8 :- has not prescribed that the candidates should have normal vision without glasses. The emphasis made by the Board is that the applicant should be free from colour blindness. The petitioner is admittedly free from colour blindness. He also has normal vision, though with glasses. In these circumstances, I am persuaded to take the view that the elimination of the petitioner's name from the ranked list on the short ground that he does not have normal vision without glasses, is arbitrary and illegal. As the Board has not prescribed that the applicant for the post of Electricity Worker (Mazdoor) should have normal vision without glasses, the stand taken by the Commission is plainly untenable. Further going by the nature of duties and functions of Electricity Workers extracted above, which mainly involve manual labour, it cannot be said that those duties and functions can be discharged only by someone having normal vision without glasses. The Board which is the employer, did not think it fit and necessary to stipulate that only persons having normal vision without glasses can be appointed as Electricity Workers. 8. In the result, I allow the Writ Petition and direct respondents 1 and 2 to include the name of the petitioner in the ranked list of Electricity Worker (Mazdoor) for Malappuram District published on 30.1.2008 at the appropriate place, if he is otherwise eligible. If upon such inclusion, the Commission finds that the turn of the petitioner for advice has arisen, the Commission shall forthwith advice him and thereupon the third respondent shall issue the necessary appointment WP(C) No.19643/08 -: 9 :- order. It is clarified that the advices already made need not be disturbed. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess 13/11