IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2010 / 29TH POUSHA 1931 WA.No. 2469 of 2008 ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.24349/2008 DATED 26/11/2008. .................... APPELLANT/PEITIONER: ------------------------------------ THULASEEDHARAN THANKAPPAN, KAPLIYIL HOUSE, PUNCHAVAYAL.P.O, PUNCHAVAYAL (VIA), MUNDAKKAYAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY, SMT.N.SANTHA, MR.K.A.BALAN, MR.PETER JOSE CHRISTO, MR.S.A.ANAND. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN:695 001. 2. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN:695 004. 3. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN:695 014. R1 & R3 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER MR. BENNY GERVACIS, R2 BY MR. ALEXANDER THOMAS, S.C. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ------------------------------ W.A. No.2469 OF 2008 ------------------------------ Dated this, the 19th day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ Balakrishnan Nair, J. The appellant is the writ petitioner. He was advised by the PSC on 29.12.1995 for appointment to the post of Sub Inspector of Police Trainee in the General Executive Branch. But, in the meantime, he became an accused in a criminal case known as Suryanelli case. It was a case of rape of a minor girl by several persons. 2. In the said case, the appellant was convicted by the trial court. But, on appeal, he was acquitted by this Court by judgment dated 20.1.2005. Thereafter, the appellant moved for appointment based on the advice dated 29.12.1995. When there was no positive response, he approached this Court by filing the present Writ Petition, seeking appropriate reliefs. The learned Single Judge took the view that the advice will not survive indefinitely and after the expiry of the W.A. No.2469/2008 - 2 - two years from the date of advice, the appointing authority cannot be compelled to make appointment. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition was dismissed. Hence, this appeal. 3. We heard the learned counsel on both sides. We are told that after the selection pursuant to which the appellant was appointed, three other selections were held and the 4th selection is underway. After the date of advice, 10 years are over. Therefore, we have no doubt in our mind that the appellant cannot claim any appointment based on the advice made in 1995. It is not in dispute that the petitioner could not have been considered for appointment between 1995 and 2005, because at that time he was either an accused or a convict in a criminal case In view of the above position, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. (K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE) (C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) ps