IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 5TH JANUARY 2009 / 15TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 37079 of 2008(L) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER : ---------------------- ABITH.C.N., S/O.NAZIR KHAN, 24 YEARS, R/AT.CHAKKITTAKIZHAKKEVEETTIL THONNALLUR, PANDHALAM P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.PAVITHRAN RESPONDENTS : ------------------------ 1. MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD., SPECIAL OFFICER, COUNCIL FOR FOOD RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, KERALA MAVELI BHAVAN, KADAVANTHRA, KOCHI-20. 2. ADDL.GENERAL MANAGER (E&P), KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD., MAVELI BHAVAN, KADANVANTHRA, COCHIN-20. 3. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT , FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH, GOVERNMETN PLEADER ADV. SMT.MOLLY JACOB,SC,SUPPLYCO THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.37079 of 2008 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 5th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner submits that in response to Exhibit P1, after gathering necessary information from the Website maintained by the first respondent, he submitted Exhibit P4 application including his Bio-data. It is stated that although Exhibit P4 was received by the respondents, he was not called for the interview. It is in this circumstances, this writ petition is filed praying that the respondents be directed to conduct fresh interview calling the petitioner also for the same. Statement has been field by respondents 1 and 2, wherein it is stated that not only that the petitioner had not applied in the prescribed form but also that he did not attach the documents showing his qualification and experience along with the application submitted. Learned standing counsel has also produced the notification published in the Website. Notification shows that the candidates were required to attach duly attested copies of the certificates mentioned in the column of the notification. Admittedly petitioner did not comply with this condition. If that be so, the respondent cannot be faulted for not calling the petitioner for interview. The writ petition fails and hence it is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE scm