IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 29TH JANUARY 2008 / 9TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 3076 of 2008(N) ------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------------- SHAMMI K.A., D/O K.K.ANDHRU, AGED 39 YEARS, KANDAMTHARAYIL HOUSE, VELLATHOOVAL P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT KANDAMTHARAYIL HOUSE, NEAR DISTRICT HOMOEO HOSPITAL, THODUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.) SMT.SARITHA DAVID CHUNKATH SMT.SMITHA GEORGE RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. R2 BY ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS,SC,KPSC R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BEJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C).No.3076 of 2008 ------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of January, 2008. JUDGMENT The issue raised by the petitioner in this case on the strength of Ext.P3 judgment is covered against him by the judgment of this court in W.P.(C)No.29293/07. Essentially, the question is whether the certificate issued by a private institution, in the nature of Ext.P3 should be accepted by the Public Service Commission for the purpose of Ext.P1 notification, read with Ext.P7 clarification, inasmuch as that the institution which issued Ext.P3 is not one of the enumerated institutions in Ext.P7. I am not in a position to find an error in the stand taken by the Public Service Commission that the petitioner is not adequately qualified in terms of the notification. Writ petition is bereft of any merit and the same is, therefore, dismissed. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy// P.S. To Judge