IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 8TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 27987 of 2008(F) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------------- ADARSH.C.B.,'SANTHI', PADA: NORTH, KARUNAGAPPALLY (P.O) KOLLAM, KERALA - 690518. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM SRI.DIPU.R SMT.MERCIAMMA MATHEW SRI.S.HARIDAS RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY IT'S SECRETARY, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMNT OF KERALA,SECRETARIAT TRIVANDRUM. 2. TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, TRANSPORT COMMISSIONERATE,2ND FLOOR, TRANS TOWER, VAZHUTHACAUD, THYCAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014. 3. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ITS'S SECRETARY, PATTOM (P.O), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SRI.B.RAJEEV, ASSISTANT MOTOR VECHICLE INSPECTOR, SSG CELL, TRANSPORT COMMISSIONERATE, 2ND FLOOR, TRANS TOWER, VAZHUTHACAUD, THYCAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695014. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ====================================== W.P.(C)No.27987 of 2008 ====================================== Dated this the 30th day of September 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner, an applicant for appointment to the post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector had earlier approached this Court complaining that the answer to Question No.33 was incorrectly shown by the Kerala Public Service Commission. According to the petitioner, the answer given by him is the correct answer and therefore he is entitled to be awarded 1.33 marks more. The said contention was repelled by a learned single judge of this Court by Ext.P4 judgment delivered on 6.2.2006. The petitioner carried the matter in appeal. By Ext.P5 judgment delivered on 6.7.2006, the Division Bench concurred with the learned Single Judge. The petitioner thereafter filed R.P.No.645 of 2006 seeking a review of Ext.P5 judgment. That was also dismissed. He thereafter moved the Apex Court by filing SLP (Civil) No.15475 of 2006. The said special leave petition was also dismissed. In this writ petition, relying on Ext.P6, the petitioner contends that the answer to question No.33 chosen by the Kerala Public W.P.(C)No.27987/2008 2 Service Commission is incorrect and that he is entitled to be awarded 1.33 marks for question No.33. 2. The petitioner's contention that answer to question No.33 was incorrectly given by the Commission, was specifically considered by this Court in paragraph-6 of Ext.P4 judgment. The relevant portion of Ext.P4 judgment reads as follows: “The next question is Question No.33 which reads thus: “A single cylinder 2 stroke engine is rotating at 2000 r.p.m. The number of power strokes produced per minute is, a) 750 b) 1000 c) 3000 d) 2000 The contention of the petitioners is that in a two stroke engine the whole cycle is completed in one revolution of the crank shaft. So the number of power strokes produced per minute is equal to the revolution per minute of the engine. In one revolution the number of power stroke is one. In 2000 revolutions per minute the number of power strokes is 2000. Therefore, the correct answer is answer (d) whereas in the answer given by the Commission it is answer (b) which is wrong. The counsel for the PSC submits that stroke means the travel of piston from one dead center to another dead center. In a two stroke W.P.(C)No.27987/2008 3 engine the four events suction, compression, power and exhaust are completed in two strokes of the piston. That is two events in every stroke. The power and exhaust are completed in the downward movement/stroke of the piston. So this movement cannot be called as power stroke because the event power happens only on half the stroke and the next half stroke is exhaust. So the number of power of stroke per minute is half of 2000 which is 1000. Therefore, the answer given in the key is the correct answer. Both rely on the text book, “Automobile Engineering Vol.2”. by Dr.Kirpal Singh at Page No.8. The petitioners also rely on the text book, “Basic Automobile Engineering” by Shri.C.P.Nakra, which contains the following at page 31. “In two stroke cycle engine, the cycle is completed in two strokes of the piston or in one revolution of the crank shaft. Thus one power stroke is obtained in each revolution of the crank shaft.” On a perusal of the data in the text book relied on by both sides and the explanation given by both sides, I am not satisfied that the answer given in the key is demonstrably wrong by an inferential process of reasoning or by a process of rationalisation as the explanation given by PSC is certainly a plausible one. As such, I am not inclined to accept the contention of the petitioners on this question also. 3. A reading of Ext.P4 judgment would show that the answer to question No.33 chosen by the Kerala Public Service Commission was held to be the correct answer. W.P.(C)No.27987/2008 4 Ext.P4 judgment has become final. In this state of affairs, he cannot contend that he is entitled to 1.33 marks for question No.33 relying on Ext.P6. The writ petition, in my opinion, misconceived and an abuse of the process of the Court. The writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE css/