IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 17TH JANUARY 2008 / 27TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 37324 of 2007(R) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------- J.RAGINI, T.C.54/1438, THAVARAMUDUMPIL HOUSE, EDAGRAMOM, KARUMOM, KARUMOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR RESPONDENT: --------------- THE KERALA TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MASCOT SQUARE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.A.AHAMED,SC FOR KTDC LTD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/01/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 37324 of 2007 -------------------------- Dated this the 17th January, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was engaged as Receptionist Trainee in the respondent Corporation during 27.1.1999 to 1.7.1999. According to her, others who were engaged along with her were retained in service even after the expiry of the period of engagement. In September, 2006, applications were invited by the respondents to the post of Receptionist on a contract basis for a period of one year. When the petitioner approached this Court raising a claim on the strength of her earlier engagement, this Court had directed that her application be considered. Petitioner was called for an interview. Ultimately, a rank list was published. Petitioner was included therein as Rank No.21. There were 10 vacancies and 10 persons have been appointed. Petitioner approaches this Court seeking a direction to the respondents to appoint her as a Hotel Receptionist. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents pointing out the above aspects. I also taken note of the fact W.P ( C) No. 37324 of 2007 2 that the petitioner is not strictly qualified to be appointed as Receptionist. Nevertheless, she was considered pursuant to the direction issued by this Court and she was included as Rank No.21 in the list. Since there were 10 vacancies to be filled up and all the 10 vacancies are filled up on a contract basis, now there is no vacancy to accommodate the petitioner. Regularity of the selection process as such is not the subject matter of this writ petition. At any rate, the petitioner has been included in the rank list though at a lower rank. In the light of the stand taken by the respondents that there is no vacancy to further enforce the rank list in question and absorb any person, I do not find any grounds to grant the reliefs prayed for by the petitioner. The writ petition is dismissed. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 37324 of 2007 2 W.P ( C) No. 37324 of 2007 2 K.THANKAPPAN,J CRL.A. NO.92 OF 1999 ORDER W.P ( C) No. 37324 of 2007 2 25th May, 2007