IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 20TH JULY 2010 / 29TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 22635 of 2010(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- KARTHIKEYAN.G, PANTHAPLAVIL THEKKATHIL, PUTHUPPALLI NORTH P.O., KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.VIMALAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF KERALA, DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRICAL INSPECTORATE GOVT. SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CHIEF ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRICAL INSPECTORATE HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SECRETARY, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY LICENSING BOARD, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.ANTONY MUKATH SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 22635 OF 2010 (D) ===================== Dated this the 20th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was an applicant for Kerala Electrical Supervisor 'A' Grade licence granted under Rule 16 to 18 of the Kerala State Electricity Licensing Board Rules. According to the petitioner, presently candidates are to appear for a written test followed by an interview conducted by the 3rd respondent, and it is without awarding any marks in the written test that the candidates are interviewed. It is stated that this results in favoritism, and therefore, the system needs to be suitably modified. 2. Although it is for the Board which conducts the selection process to lay down the method of its assessment of suitability, now that the petitioner is complaining about the system that is followed, it is for the Board to consider the request of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, he has filed Ext.P11 before the 1st respondent with copy to respondents 2 and 3 and this request has not been considered so far. 3. Having regard to this contention of the petitioner, I direct the 3rd respondent to consider Ext.P11 and take WPC No. 22635/10 :2 : appropriate decision in the matter. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the claim raised by the petitioner and the entire issue is left open to the 3rd respondent to consider. Orders on Ext.P11 shall be passed at any rate within 8 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp