IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 16TH JANUARY 2009 / 26TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 1789 of 2009(K) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- 1. DR.D.RAJMOHAN, 93/1, KRISHNA KRIPA, ISWARYA GARDENS, KOOKANCHERRY, TRICHUR, PIN 680007 PRESENTLY WORKING AS CIVIL SURGEON, DISTRICT HOSPITAL, TRICHUR. 2. DR.BALCHANDRAN, PLAKKAT HOUSE, THIRPAD ROAD, OLLUR P.O, PRESENTLY WORKING AS ASSISTANT SURGEON, DISTRICT HOSPITAL, TRICHUR. 3. DR.C.V.MERCY PRESENTLY WORKING AS CIVIL SURGEON AND SUPERINTENDENT, PUBLIC HEALTH CENTER, ELIYAPPUZHA, TRICHUR DT. 4. DR.P.J.ALOYSIOUS, PRESENTLY WORKING AS DY.DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, O/O THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, TRICHUR DT. 5. DR.JACOB, CHETTIMATTOM, THOUDUPUZHA EAST P.O, PRESENTLY WORKING AS CIVIL SURGEON, COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTRE, ADIMALI. 6. DR.C.MUHAMMED, PRESENTLY WORKING AS ASST.SURGEON, P.H.C. EDARIKKODE, MALAPPURAM BY ADV. SRI.T.P.SAJAN SRI.L.ALOYSIUS THOMAS SRI.M.MOHAMED NAVAZ WPC NO.1789/09 -2- RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, O/O THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. GOVT.PLEADER SMT.SUDHADEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/01/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============== W.P.(C) NO. 1789 OF 2009 (K) ==================== Dated this the 16th day of January, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioners are Medical Officers under the Kerala Health Service. According to them, upto 2004, 40% of the post graduate seats were reserved in their favour and the system was discontinued since then. Subsequently, Act 29/08 was introduced and in terms of Section 5, the 1st respondent reserved unto itself the power to reserve upto 40% of the seats towards service quota. It is stated that in pursuance to the Act mentioned above, Ext.P2 prospectus has been issued, in which, out of the 40% seats, 10% seats are reserved for candidates eligible for age relaxation. Petitioner submits that restricting the maximum seats available to those eligible for age relaxation to 10% of the 40% seats reserved is irrational and illegal. It is stated that they have made Ext.P3 representation to the 1st respondent seeking rectification of this anomaly. 2. In this writ petition, although several contentions with regard to the unsustainability of the aforesaid restriction have been raised, having regard to the fact that the petitioners have already moved the 1st respondent by Ext.P3, I do not think that, atleast at this stage, it is necessary for this Court to pronounce on the merits of the contentions. WPC 1789/09 :2 : 3. Since the petitioners have made Ext.P3 to the 1st respondent, it is ordered that the 1st respondent shall consider the same, if the said representation has been received and is pending. Orders shall be passed on Ext.P1, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 4 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Petitioners may produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the 1st respondent for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp