IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2009 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 29163 of 2009(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ABDU MANAF, S/O.MUHAMMED K KALADI HOUSE, NEDUMBALA, MEPPADI PO WAYANAD DIST. BY ADV. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD VAIDYUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, KERLA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. MR.ALEXANDER THOMAS, SC FOR PSC MR.K.S.ANIL, SC FOR KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.29163/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF NOTIFICATION FOR THE POST OF METER READER/SPOT BILLER. P2 : COPY OF ADMISSION TICKET. P3 : COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES OF THE PROBABILITY LIST. P4 : COPY OF NOTIFICATION DATED 01/10/2009. P5 : COPY OF DIRECTIONS ISSUED TO THE CANDIDATE ALONG WITH EXT.P2. P6 : COPY OF DIRECTIONS TO THE CANDIDATE DOWNLOADED FROM THE NET. P7 : APPROXIMATE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIOENR TO R2 TOGETHER WITH POSTAL RECEIPT DATED 05/10/2009. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.29163 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 3rd day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner was a candidate in response to Ext.P1 notification published by the 2nd respondent for filling up the post of Meter Reader/Spot Biller under the 1st respondent. The petitioner appeared for the test and finally by Ext.P4 his candidature was invalidated for the reason that register number not bubbled or wrongly bubbled. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the Commission does not have a case that due to error in the bubbling, the process of selection was in any way affected or that the identity of the candidate became unknown or obscure. It is also his case that in view of the fact that the register number is written separately and correctly, there is no case of even a wrong identification. It is contended that in such a situation, it is arbitrary to invalidate the candidature of an applicant. 3. However, it is seen from the instructions issued by the WP(C) No.29163/2009 -2- PSC to the candidates, a copy of which is produced as Ext.P5 in the writ petition, it was specified that in case any mistake is committed in the bubbling, the candidature is liable to be invalidated. According to the PSC, there has been a mistake in the bubbling, and by invalidating the candidature, they were only enforcing the instructions strictly and uniformly. 4. It is not in dispute that the instructions required the PSC to invalidate the candidature of an applicant, in case a mistake has been committed in bubbling. In this case, evidently it was because of this reason that the candidature was invalidated. If that be so, the PSC was only enforcing the instructions it has issued, which is referred to above as Ext.P5 and the PSC cannot be faulted for such an action, which it is bound to take. 5. My attention is also invited to the judgment of a learned Single Judge in WP(C) No.34380/2008 dated 28/01/2009, where on account of a mistake in bubbling the rejection of candidature of an applicant has been upheld by this Court, and it has been held that the PSC is bound to observe the instructions strictly in the light of the larger public interest, and that when the consequences of the WP(C) No.29163/2009 -3- breach have been clearly spelled out and discretion is not given to condone the same, the instructions should be strictly observed. In view of the judgment also, I cannot find fault with the PSC in invalidating the candidature of the petitioner. This writ petition fails, and is accordingly dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg