IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 21ST AUGUST 2008 / 30TH SRAVANA 1930 RP.No. 800 of 2008(U) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.35668/2003 Dated 01/06/2007 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER / PETITIONER IN W.P.(C) -------------------------------- DHARMARAJ.P.A ,KODIPPURATHU VEEDU PAZHAKUTTY P.O., NEDUMANGADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY ADV. SRI.P.LEELAKRISHNAN SRI.SHYAM KRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TECHNICAL EDUCATION DEPARTEMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISION REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, OFFICE OF THE PSC PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 3. THE SECRETARY KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION PSC BUILIDNGS, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 4. THE DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.SANDESH RAJA. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J. ----------------------------------------- R.P. NO.800/2008 IN W.P.(C) NO. 35668 OF 2003-U ----------------------------------------- ORDER The petitioner was a candidate for appointment to the post of Rehabilitation Technician Grade II (Prosthetics). The P.S.C found that he was not qualified for the post. Though, he was included in the list, the P.S.C., by Ext.P13 order dated 17.9.2001, removed him from the list after following the due procedure. The aggrieved petitioner challenged that order before this Court. This Court dismissed the writ petition by the judgment under review, holding that the point raised by the petitioner was covered against him by another decision of this Court. 2. The rank list published by the P.S.C for appointment to the above post, pursuant to Ext.P3 notification, has already expired in 2004. This R.P is filed now, in 2008, seeking review of that judgment and re-hearing of the writ petition on merits. Since the rank list has already expired in 2004 and the vacancies reported were already filled RP 800/2008 2 up by advising candidates, no relief could be granted to the petitioner at this distance of time. The petitioner submits, there were justifiable grounds for the delay in filing this R.P. Even assuming that the petitioner is justified in approaching this Court belatedly with this R.P., no relief could be granted to him, owing to efflux of time. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are several vacancies in the post concerned even now. But, that is not a reason to review the judgment. The P.S.C can advise candidates only to those vacancies, which were reported before the expiry of the rank list, in view of the several decisions of this Court. Such vacancies were already filled up, based on the advice of the P.S.C. Now those advices have to be re-opened, if relief is to be granted to the review petitioner. The same is impermissible after the lapse of four years. Accordingly, the Review Petition is dismissed. 21st August, 2008. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. Nm/