IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 7TH JUNE 2010 / 17TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 10313 of 2010(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- MUSTHAFA C.K., S/O.MUHAMMEDALI C.K., MUSTHAFA MANZIL, MONGAM P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-673 642. BY ADV. SRI.C.R.SIVAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, POVERTY ALLEVIATION UNIT(D.P.), COLLECTORATE, KANNUR. 3. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DISTRICT OFFICER, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, KANNUR. SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS, SC, PSC GOVT.PLEADER SRI.ARAVNDKUMAR BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 10313 OF 2010 (L) ===================== Dated this the 7th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P6, by which a representation made by the petitioner for extension of time to join the post of Village Extension Officer Grade II was rejected informing him that the non joining vacancy was reported and yet another candidate was advised against that NJD vacancy. 2. Facts of the case are that in response to a notification issued by the PSC, petitioner applied for the post of Village Extension Officer, Grade II. By Ext.P2 dated 5/10/09, he was informed that he was advised for appointment. The appointment order was issued to the petitioner on 8/10/09 and according to the learned Government Pleader, the appointment order was returned by the postal authorities and this reached the 2nd respondent on 20/10/2009. The NJD vacancy was reported to the PSC and on 31/10/2009 another candidate was advised and was appointed. 3. Subsequently, on 2/1/2010, learned Government Pleader submits that application was received from the petitioner seeking extension of time for joining the post. This was followed WPC No. 10313/10 :2 : by Ext.P4 and it was thereupon that, by Ext.P6, the petitioner was informed that the non joining vacancy was reported and yet another candidate was advised for appointment. 4. The contention raised by the counsel for the petitioner is that by Ext.P5 Government order, the candidates working abroad were given six months time or till the end of one month after the expiry of the contract period with the employer to join in response to an advise by the PSC. However, as rightly pointed out by the learned Government Pleader, such extension of time is possible only on an application and that too should have been made before the NJD vacancy was reported and the candidate appointed. 5. In this case, admittedly, the application was made by the petitioner only in January, 2010 and long prior to that, the NJD vacancy was reported and another candidate was appointed. In such circumstances, Ext.P5 Government Order is not of any assistance to the petitioner. I do not find any merit in this writ petition. Writ petition is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp