IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY THURSDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 28TH MAGHA 1932 WA.No. 222 of 2011() -------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN WPC.3856/2011 Dated 14/02/2011 .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS: -------------- 1. BJU KUMAR S.N., S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR, AGED 45 YEARS, EMPLOYED AS ASSISTANT MANAGER, KSFE, POOVAR BRANCH AND RESIDING AT SANTHWANAM, BHAGAVATHINADA, TRIVANDRUM. 2. JAYAPRAKASH.K.V., S/O.KUNJUKRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 45 YEARS, EMPLOYED AS ASSISTANT MANAGER, KSFE, PARASSALA BRANCH AND RESIDING AT LAKSHMANA VILASOM, NEYYATTINKARA, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.G.P.SHINOD SRI.RAM MOHAN.G. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. M/S.KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD., BHADRATHA BUILDING, MUSEUM ROAD, THRISSUR-680 020, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER(P&HR), M/S.KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LTD., BHADRATHA BUILDING, MUSEUM ROAD, THRISSUR-680 020. BY ADV. SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR, SC THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & BHABANI PRASAD RAY, JJ. .................................................................... Writ Appeal No.222 of 2011 .................................................................... Dated this the 17th day of February, 2011. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Challenge is against the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge declining appellants' request for permission to participate in the examination being conducted by KSFE for selection to the Post of Manager Grade-IV. Admittedly eligibility for participation in the examination is three years' service in the cadre of Assistant Manager. Both the appellants have a shortage in service in the cadre of Assistant Manager by 11 days. According to the appellants, the promotion to the vacancies to which they claimed posting as Assistant Managers was delayed by the KSFE and it is only on account of the same, they could not complete three years' service. The claim made by the appellants is denied by counsel appearing for KSFE. Examination is proposed to be held on 20th of this month and as many as above 60 people are found eligible for participation in the examination. The learned Single Judge has not considered eligibility of the appellants for participation in the W.A. 222/2011 2 examination which naturally will be decided during hearing of the W.P. (C). When interim order was sought for permission to write the examination subject to result of W.P.(C), the learned Single Judge declined the same by stating that if the appellants are found eligible, K.S.F.E. Will be compelled to conduct a fresh examination. 2. In our view, the aggrieved party in the interim order is the K.S.F.E. because holding of another test is more cumbersome than permitting appellants to write the examination subject to their eligibility declared by this court. In the circumstances, we feel even in the interest of the Corporation, the test should not be allowed to be conducted once again for the sake of two persons, if they are found eligible. Further, if appellants are allowed to write the examination, the same will not render any right on them as far as their claim in the W.P. (C) is concerned. So much so, we allow the Writ Appeal by reversing the interim order of the learned Single Judge and direct the first respondent to permit the appellants to participate in the examination based on this order subject to result of the Writ Petition pending before the learned Single Judge. The Corporation will file counter affidavit W.A. 222/2011 3 and argue the Writ Petition at an early date so that by the time results are published, the appellants' merit will be known to the Corporation. Examination papers also could be valued, but result of examination written by the appellants will be withheld and will be released only based on direction contained in the judgment of the learned Single Judge. If the Single Judge does not uphold the claim of the appellants, then the examinations written by them could be cancelled through the judgment. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge BHABANI PRASAD RAY Judge pms