IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2008 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 13623 of 2008(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ C.K.SHIHAB, CHEERANKULANGARA HOUSE, VARAMBANALA, THAYYILAPADI, (PO) VALAVANNOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 551. BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR, VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. M.R.SREELATHA SC SRI. ALEXANDER THOMAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).13623/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 26th day of May, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner who has completed the course of VHSE (Livestock Management) conducted by the third respondent, is aggrieved by the delay in the publication of the results of the examination in which he had participated. But in the meanwhile PSC, after a period of nine years, proceeded to issue a notification, Ext.P1, inviting applications for the post of Livestock Inspector Grade-II, Poultry Assistant, Milk Recorder/Store Keeper etc., in the Animal Husbandry Department. The qualification prescribed in this regard is VHSC in Livestock Management as main subject. Essentially, the petitioners contend that had the Public Service Commision delayed the publication of the notification by a few months, they would have been eligible to apply in response to Ext.P1 and they also contend that had the results of their examination conducted by the third respondent been published earlier, they would still have been in a position to apply in response to the same W.P.(C).13623/2008 2 notification. But that has not happened. Unfortunately PSC cannot be found fault with for issuing a notification and now that the results of the examination conducted by the third respondent has been published, after the last date of the receipt of the application as notified in Ext.P1, this Court is not in a position to extend any indulgence in favour of the petitioner. Writ petition is bereft of merit and the same is dismissed. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs