IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 30TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 23946 of 2009(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SUJATHA.M.V., MUPALLY HOUSE, PURATHESHERI P.O., IRINGALAKUDA NORTH, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.V.P.REGHURAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE DISTRICT OFFICER KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, THRISSUR. ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS,SC,KPSC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/11/2009, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 30709 OF 2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) Nos.23946/09 & 30709/09 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioners were candidates who had applied in response to a notification issued by the PSC for the post of Confidential Assistants Grade-II. 2. In so far as WP(c).No.23946/09 is concerned, Ext.P12 is the Government Order prescribing the qualifications for the post and Ext.P8 is the notification issued by the PSC. Accordingly, petitioners were allowed to participate in the selection process and they were included in the priority list. However, they were issued memos stating that their applications are rejected as they were not having the prescribed qualification. It was thereupon that these writ petitions are filed. 3. Reasons given by the PSC in its counter affidavit is that one of the qualifications prescribed for the post is Lower Grade Certificate in Typewriting(English)/KGTE and Computer Word Processing or its equivalent(GO.(P)No.19/04/P&ARD dated 812.04). There is also a note, which states that those who have passed the KGTE Typewriting before 2002 should produce WPC.Nos.23946 /09 & anor. :2 : separate certificate in Computer Word Processing or its equivalent. It is stated by the PSC that since qualifications which are equivalent to the prescribed Word Processing Qualification was not specifically incorporated and prescribed, the commission considered the matter and decided as per its proceedings dated 15.12.2006 that Computer Word Processing qualification acquired, after undergoing a course of not less that 3 months duration, conducted by the Central or State Government departments, agencies, societies or universities alone will be accepted as equivalent to the prescribed word processing qualification for the selection. It is stated that the said decision was taken by the Commission invoking its power under Rule 13(b) of KS & SSR and that the decision has been upheld by the judgment of this court in the judgment in WP(c). Nos.12969/07 and 12356/07. It is also stated that a Division Bench of this Court confirmed the correctness of the view taken in the aforesaid judgment in W.A. Nos.1852/07 and 2379/09. 4. In these writ petitions a perusal of the case of the petitioners shows that the qualification which they possess did not meet the requirement of the PSC as laid down by it in its WPC.Nos.23946 /09 & anor. :3 : proceedings dated 15.12.2006 and if that be so, in particularly, having regard to the judgments referred to above, upholding the decision of the PSC, the order of the PSC rejecting their candidature cannot be faulted. Writ petitions fail and are dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/