IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 26TH JUNE 2008 / 5TH ASHADHA 1930 WA.No. 810 of 2008() ---------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.29451/2006 Dated 21/02/2008 .................... APPELLANTS/ PETITIONERS -------------------------------------- 1. RAJESH K.K., S/O K.P.KESAVAN, KARIPPATHARA HOUSE, MELOOR POST, CHALAKKUDY VIA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. M.C.RAJEEV, S/O LATE M.K.CHELLAPPAN, MOOSARIPARAMBIL HOUSE, THIRVALLOOR, ALANGAD P.O., ALUVA (VIA), ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. BIJU XAVIER T., THOTTAKKARA HOUSE, CHULLY POST, EREPPU, ANGAMALY (VIA), ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. PRASAD P.S., PATTATH HOUSE, KUNNAPPILLY P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. 5. RAJITHA K.K., KALAPPURAKKAL HOUSE, MELOOR POST POOLANI, CHALAKKUDY VIA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 6. BINOY M.B., MALAYENKUDI HOUSE, MELOOR POST, POOLANI, CHALAKKUDY VIA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 7. JOSE URMESE, MUTTENTHOTTIL VEEDU, PARIYARAM P.O., CHALAKKUDY VIA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 8. MAYA T.S., THANDATHI VEEDU, MALAYATTOOR P.O., ELLITHODU, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 9. GOPAKUMAR P.G., S/O P.N.GANGADHARAN NAIR, PUNNAKKATTIL HOUSE, KALADY P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. W.A. NO.810/2008 10. NOUSHAD K.A., KARIMPILCHIRA HOUSE, CHENGALAM SOUTH P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 11. SASIKUMAR C.K., MUNJULLIMALIYIL HOUSE, PERUMPAIKAD P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 12. JOBY P.J., THEKKUDAN HOUSE, VENGINISSERRY, PARALAM POST, THRISSUR DIST. 13. PRAKASAN T.T., THACHAUMPURATHU HOUSE, PADINJARE VEMBALLUR, EDAVILANGU POST, S.N.PURAM, THRISSUR DIST. 14. KARTHIKEYAN K.K., KUNNATHU HOUSE, P.O.VEMBALLUR, KODUNGALLORE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 15. SABU T.V., THACHUMPURATH HOUSE, VEMBALLUR POST, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 16. BABU K., KARIPPALI HOUSE, THALASSERRY POST, DESAMANGALAM (VIA), THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K. SRI.LIJU. M.P RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS ----------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF SURVEY & LAND RECORDS, VAZHUTHACADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SMIJO V.K., S/O KUNJIPALU, VADAKKUMBADAN HOUSE, ANNANADU P.O., CHALAKKUDY (VIA), THRISSUR DISTRICT. 5. SUNIL NARAYANAN, S/O A.V.NARAYANAN, AMBATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, THURAVOOR POST, PULLANI, ANKAMALY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. W.A. NO.810/2008 6. ABHILASH C.T., S/O THANKAPPAN, CHERUVELIL PUTHENPURA, NERIYAMANGALAM POST, COLONY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 7. SUNILDAS S.V., S/O VARGHESE, S.V.NIVAS, EANTHIKALA, ARAYOOR POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 8. SHERIF, S/O HANEEFA, ACHATHANI, THENKURUSI P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. *ADDL R9 TO R12 ARE IMPLEADED ADDL. R9. MATHEW K.T., KOOLIPARAMBIL HOUSE, VILANGAD.P.O., KALLACHI VIA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. ADDL. R10.ABDUL KHADER B.C., BAVATTIPALIL HOUSE, PANNIKKOTTUR.P.O., KODUVALLY VIA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. ADDL. R11.SIDHEEQUE.K., KAZHAYIKKAL HOUSE, CHERUVADI.P.O., MAVOOR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. ADDL. R12.MUHAMMED SHABEER CHAKKITTUPURETH, CHAKKITTUPURETH HOUSE, CHERUVADI.P.O., MAVOOR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. *ADDL. R9 TO R12 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 26/06/2008 IN I.A. NO.370/08. **ADDL. R13 TO R19 ARE IMPLEADED ADDL. R13. SUNIL KUMAR V.P., VAYOLIPURAYIL HOUSE, KARAYATHANKAVU.P.O., KOZHIKODE. ADDL. R14. RAJESH.P.N., PULICKAL HOUSE, EACHOME.P.O., PANAMARAM, WAYANAD. ADDL. R15. SHAFEEK.M.K., NELLIYOTIE HOUSE, KARIYATHANKAVU.P.O., BALUSSERY, KOZHIKODE. ADDL. R16. SIDHEEQUE.K., KAZHAYIKKAL HOUSE, CHERUVADI.P.O., MAVOOR, KOZHIKODE. ADDL. R17. MUHAMMED SHABEER, CHEKKITTUPURATH, CHEKKITTUPURATH HOUSE, CHERUVADI.P.O., MAVOOR, KOZHIKODE. W.A NO.810/2008. ADDL. R18. SUNIL.C.K., KALLANGAPOYIL HOUSE, THAMARASSERY.P.O., KOZHIKODE. ADDL. R19. ABDUL GAFOOR.C.M., CHETHIL MEETHAL HOUSE, PUNNASSERY.P.O., NARIKKUNI, KOZHIKODE. **ADDL. R.13 TO R.19 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 26/06/2008 IN NO. I.A.589/08. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BENNY GERVACIS ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS,SC,KPSC - R3 SRI.R.K.MURALEEDHARAN – ADDL.R9- 15 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/06/2008, ALONG WITH WA NO. 1043 OF 2008, WA NO. 1112 OF 2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B. Koshy & P.N.Ravindran, JJ. --------------------------------------------------- W.A. No. 810, 1043 and 1112 of 2008 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of June, 2008 Judgment Koshy,J. Appellants in these cases applied for the post of Surveyor Grade II in pursuance to the notification issued by the Public Service Commission. Qualification prescribed for the above post is as follows: "(1) A pass in S.S.L.C. examination or possession of any of the other equivalent qualification specified in the schedule to Part II of the General Rules. (2) Must possess:- (i) I.T.I. (Surveyor Trade) Certificate introduced with effect from the year 1966; or (ii) The I.T.I. (Surveyor Trade) Certificate issued prior to the year 1966 and satisfactorily completed six months inplant training according to the rules approved by the Board of Revenue in this regard; or (iii) A pass in Surveying and Levelling (Higher) M.G.T.E. or K.G.T.E. with Chain Survey Test; or W.A.No. 810, 1043 & 1112/2008 2 (iv) Experience in Military service for a period of six years in Surveyor trade; Provided that in the absence of candidates with the technical qualifications mentioned above, a pass in Higher Survey Test shall be deemed sufficient: Provided further that in the absence of candidates with any of the technical qualifications mentioned above, a pass in Chain Survey Test shall be deemed sufficient." Petitioners are candidates who passed chain survey test. According to the petitioners considering the spirit of rule 12A (ii) of the rules of procedure, candidates with lower alternate qualification prescribed for the post also shall be considered as held by this court in Ajit Kumar v. State of Kerala (1987 (2) KLT 55 SN Case No.80). The above rule is only for guidance and not mandatory. It is for the PSC to consider the same depending upon the number of applications received and depending upon the number of vacancies. It is submitted that large number of applications were received pursuant to the notification. Total eligible applications received from persons other than candidates having alternate lower qualification prescribed (like that of the appellants) was more than 9000. Number of candidates who actually attended the test was 3666. W.A.No. 810, 1043 & 1112/2008 3 Notified vacancy was only 295. It is also stated that total number of vacancies inclusive of the anticipated vacancy before the expiry of the list is only 525. Even excluding diploma and degree holders who applied within the first four mandatory qualifications prescribed are 3057, that is, more than six times of the required personnel. Under rule 12A discretionary power is vested on the PSC to prepare one or more rank list depending upon the circumstances of each case. Considering the number of applications received from the well-qualified candidates, the learned Judge held that the stand adopted by the P.S.C. was fully justified. Only if sufficient candidates as mentioned in (i) to (iv) are not available, the question of calling the other candidates will arise. If number of candidates applied with prescribed qualifications are not sufficient PSC in its discretion can call for the candidates with lesser qualification prescribed. Here, the position was different. We are of the view that the learned Judge was perfectly justified as sufficient number of qualified candidates have applied and, therefore, question of calling persons who are lesser qualified need not arise. It is submitted that such persons were called for the test in earlier years. That depends upon the number of qualified candidates applied in pursuance of the notification issued and that cannot W.A.No. 810, 1043 & 1112/2008 4 be treated as a precedent. It is further submitted that few persons who came with writ petitions much before the test was conducted were allowed to write the test. The test was conducted in 2006. Regarding the date of the test, wide publicity was given and few similarly placed persons who were not called for the interview approached this court before the interview. Without going into the merits, some candidates were allowed to write the test by the interim order. That will not entitle the petitioner to ask for a direction to the P.S.C. to cancel the test already conducted and conduct another test or a separate test for the petitioners/appellants as qualified candidates were available in sufficient number. Question of considering the persons like petitioners will arise only if qualified candidates are not available. In the above circumstances, we fully agree with the view of the learned single Judge and appeals are dismissed. J.B.Koshy Judge P.N.Ravindran Judge vaa W.A.No. 810, 1043 & 1112/2008 5 W.A.No. 810, 1043 & 1112/2008 6 J.B. KOSHY AND P.N.RAVINDRAN,JJ. ------------------------------------- W.A.Nos.810, 1043 and 1112 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Judgment Dated:26th June, 2008