IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 14TH JUNE 2011 / 24TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 14609 of 2010(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- SMT.SREEKALA DEVI M.S., METHALA HOUSE, KOTTANGAL P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA-686547. BY ADVS. SRI.S.EASWARAN SRI.P.MURALEEDHARAN (IRIMPANAM) RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE DISTRICT OFFICER, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, DISTRICT OFFICE, PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (EDUCATION), PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, KPSC FOR R1 & 2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kp T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.14609/2010-A ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 14th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner who was included as rank No.1 in the Supplementary list of the ranked list for appointment to the post of High School Assistant (Physical Science) in Pathanamthitta District has approached this Court seeking for a direction to the respondents to consider her claim for advice and consequential appointment in any of the existing vacancies. 2. The petitioner belongs to Viswakarma Community. The ranked list was valid from 30/12/2006 to 30/12/2009 and was extended till April, 2010. According to the petitioner, the advices made from various communities are not correctly done which has affected the chances of the petitioner. 3. In the affidavit initially filed by the Public Service Commission on 26/05/2010 in para.3 it was pointed out that 16 vacancies upto 31/03/2010 were reported and, two more vacancies were reported on 12/04/2010 and 30/04/2010. At the time of reporting these vacancies, the rotation stood at MRI 57 OC W.P.(C). No.14609/2010 -:2:- (already filled) and the said two vacancies were filled up by satisfying the turns of MR I 59 OC and MR I 54.E, and it is pointed out that the petitioner could not be included. 4. Again an additional affidavit was filed on 12/07/2010 wherein it is mentioned that advice against turn of MR I 20V was made on 06/06/1998 from a previous ranked list. Apart from the turn of 20 V, the other turns of Viswakarma Community, for posts other than that in last grade service, as per the Annexure to Rule 15 of K.S & S.S.R Part II are 70 V and 100 V. The petitioner who is included only in the Viswakarma Supplementary list of the ranked list, is eligible to be considered only against a reserved turn due for Viswakarma Community. While making advices against the vacancies reported during the currency of the ranked list, the turn of the petitioner with rank No.1 in Viswakarma supplementary list of that ranked list had not arisen and hence, the petitioner could not be advised. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there were nine vacancies which were reported in terms of the interim order passed by this Court in W.P.(C).No.25851/2009. W.P.(C). No.14609/2010 -:3:- 6. A reading of the Judgment in W.P.(C). No.25851/2009 shows that this Court directed three vacancies to be filled up from the direct recruitment quota and advise three candidates out of the nine vacancies reported pursuant to the interim order dated 31/03/2010. It was further directed that the balance six vacancies reported pursuant to the interim order will stand cancelled. The above direction was issued after considering the number of posts available for each quota including direct recruitment quota. Herein, the turns available to the Viswakarma Community are 20 V, 70 V and 100 V. Evidently, the next turn due is 70 V and that has not reached. The petitioner could not therefore expect advice to be made being a candidate included in the supplementary list in any of the vacancies already reported. Apart from that the list stood cancelled in May, 2010. For this reason also, the petitioner is not entitled to succeed in the writ petition and the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Sd/- (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms