IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2008 / 29TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 12201 of 2008(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ 1. SHAJI.V., S/O.VINCENT, RESIDING AT CHERUPUSHPAM, NRA (E) 15, PEROOKADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PRESENTLY WORKING AS DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, NEDUMANGAD. 2. M.KHALEELU RAHMAN, S/O.LATE S.M.ABDULLA, RESIDING AT ROSE HOUSE, MANNAMMOLA, PEROORKADA, PRESENTLY WORKING AS VILLAGE OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.RAM MOHAN.G. SRI.G.P.SHINOD SRI.MANU V. RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM PALACE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE JOINT SECRETARY (DEPARTMENTAL TESTS) OFFICE OF THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM PALACE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS,SC,KPSC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 12201 of 2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1- A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.DE III(2) 10144/07/EW DATED 1ST RESPONDENT PUBLISHED IN THE KERALA GAZETTE NO.37 DATED 18.9.07 EXT.P2- A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER NO.DE III(2) 10144/07 EW THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 12.3.08 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P3- A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ADMISSION TICKET DATED 29.11.06 FOR THE KERALA CRIMINAL JUDICIAL TEST CONDUCTED IN DECEMBER 2006 ISSSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXT.P4- A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER NO.DE III(2) 10144/07/EW THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 12.3.08 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER (TRUE COPY) P.A TO JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN, J ------------------- W.P.(C).12201/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 20th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioners are working as Deputy Tahsildar and Village Officer respectively. They applied for appearing in the Kerala Criminal Judicial Test, 2007 conducted by the Kerala Public Service Commission, which was held on 17.4.2008 and 18.4.2008. The applications submitted by the petitioners were rejected by Exts.P2 and P4 memos respectively. The first petitioner's application was rejected on the ground that the designation of the attesting authority is not affixed on the photograph. The second petitioner's application was rejected on the ground that the name of the attesting authority is not mentioned in the application. This writ petition was thereupon filed seeking the following reliefs:- (i). To issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Ext.P2 and Ext.P4 letters rejecting the applications submitted by the petitioners for appearing for the Kerala Criminal Judicial Test, 2007 to be conducted by the 1st W.P.(C).12201/2008 2 respondent. (ii). Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records leading to Ext.P1 and quash clause 16 therein to the extent the same prescribes outright rejection of the applications for defects noted thereunder. (iii). To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the respondents 1 and 2; to accept the applications submitted by the petitioners 1 and 2 and issue them the admission tickets for enabling them to appear for the Part II papers of the Kerala Criminal Judicial Test, 2007 to be held on 17.4.2008 and 18.4.2008. 2. Pursuant to the interim direction issued by this Court on 10.4.2008, the petitioners appeared for the Kerala Criminal Judicial Test, 2007, held on 17.4.2008 and 18.4.2008. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that in identical circumstances, other applicants had approached this Court in W.P.(C).38228 of 2007 and connected cases and that by judgment delivered on 3.6.2008, the said writ petitions were disposed of with a direction to the Kerala W.P.(C).12201/2008 3 Public Service Commission to consider whether the defects noted in the rejection memos are curable or condonable and to take further action after such enquiry. I have perused a copy of the judgment dated 3.6.2008 in W.P.(C).38228 of 2007 and connected cases. This Court had disposed of the said writ petitions with the following directions:- (a). The Commission may consider whether the defects noted in the rejection memos issued in each one of the cases itself is condonable or curable, as the case may be. (b). It they are so curable and condonable, an opportunity may be granted to the petitioners, to cure the same. (c). If the Public Service Commission feels that the defects cannot be and should not be permitted to be cured or condoned, then it shall issue a notice to the applicant conveying its proposal to do so. Then the applicants will be entitled to submit his/her objections and if the Commission decides to affirm the proposal, it shall pass an order indicating its reasons for arriving at such a decision and communicate the same W.P.(C).12201/2008 4 to the applicants. (d). The participation of the petitioners in the respective examinations shall be treated as regular and valid subject to the decision to be taken by the Commission as aforementioned. (e). If the Commission finds that the defects involved in each one of the applications is curable and condonable, it should be condoned or allowed to be cured. (f). The results of the participation of each one of the applicants shall be declared and further consequential action taken, subject to the decision to be taken by the Commission as mentioned above. 3. In my opinion, the aforementioned directions will redress the grievances voiced by the petitioners in this writ petition as well. Therefore, this writ petition is also disposed of in terms of the directions issued by this Court in W.P.(C).38228 of 2007 and connected cases. Ordered accordingly. P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge mrcs