IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 22ND MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 36532 of 2008(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SULFEEKAR B, SULFI MANZIL, MANJAPPARA P.O., AYOOR, KOLLAM 691 533. BY ADV. SRI.ABHILASH S.FRANCIS SRI.C.K.PRASAD SRI.SUKUL KHADER RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM PALACE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 2. THE DISTRICT OFFICER, THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REGIONAL OFFICE, KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS,STANDING COUNSEL,KPSC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.36532/2008-Y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 11th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner, a physically handicapped person having 90% locomotor disability, is aggrieved by the non inclusion of his name in the rank list for appointment as Last Grade Servant. The petitioner has passed the Vocational Higher Secondary course. According to him he has got experience on a temporary basis in various posts, especially as a Lab Assistant, which is evidenced by Ext.P2 series. He was included in the short list published by the Public Service Commission for the disabled persons category and was called for the interview on 24/07/2008. Ext.P4 is the disability certificate produced by him at the time of interview. But in the final rank list, his name did not appear pursuant to which he submitted Ext.5 representation and as no action was there on it he preferred an appeal before the appellate authority as per Ext.P7. 2. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit. It is pointed out that the petitioner was invited for certificate verification and suitability assessment by the Commission on 24/07/2008. At the time of certificate verification, prior to the interview, he has produced medical certificate showing that he has 90% permanent disability, belonging to severe W.P.(C) No.36532/2008 -:2:- category. Then he was allowed to participate in the interview. The Interview Board conducted the assessment of suitability and found him unsuitable and hence, he was not included in the ranked list. It is pointed out that the suitability assessment of physically handicapped candidates is to find out whether they are physically able to perform the duties attached to the concerned posts. 3. In the light of the above averments, the question is whether the non-inclusion of the petitioner in the ranked list is justified or not. The post in question is a Last Grade Servant's post. The Interview Board has assessed his disability to find whether he is suitable to be appointed to perform the duties attached to the concerned post. It is the satisfaction of the Board that governs the matter. It cannot be said that there were any extraneous reasons which are mala fide in nature to exclude the petitioner from selection. The assessment was made on the basis of the disability suffered by him which was evidenced by the certificate as well as the result of the interview conducted. The general conditions have specified that such candidate will be considered if he is found to be otherwise suitable only. Therefore, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms