IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2009 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 30110 of 2008(H) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- MRS.JOPHY P.J, W/O.SABU M.J. MUTTICKAL HOUSE, KALLETTINKARA P.O., KUNDUPADAM ROAD, THRISSUR – 680 683. BY ADV. MR.K.S.BHARATHAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GASES, NEW DETHI. 2. THE DISTRIBUTOR SELECTION COMMITTEE, BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD., KOCHI LPG TERRITORY OFFICE, AMBALAMUGAL, KOCHI – 682 302. 3. THE CO-ORDINATOR, BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.,KOCHI LPG TERRITORY OFFICE, AMBALAMUGAL KOCHI-682 302. 4. K.V.EASEPH, DEPUTY MANAGER (PLNG/CORDN), OPS, BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD., KOCHI LPG TERRITORY OFFICE, AMBALAMUGAL, KOCHI-682302. 5. THE TERRITORY MANAGER (L.P.G.) BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD., KOCHI LPG TERRITORY OFFICE, AMBALAMUGAL, KOCHI-682 302. W.P.(C). NO.30110/2008-H: *ADDL.R6 IMPLEADED: 6. MRS RAKHY SUNILKUMAR, W/O. K.R. SUNILKUMAR, KAITHAKKAPUZHA VEEDU, KARUVANNUR.P.O., ETTUMANA DESOM, PIN – 680 711. *ADDITIONAL R6 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 17/02/09 IN I.A. NO. 1713/2009. R1 BY ADV. MR. P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.S.G, R2 TO R5 BY MR. N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADV. MR.S.SUJIN, ADDL.R6 BY MR.N.RAGHURAJ. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/04/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.30110/2008-H: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE ADVERTISEMENT DTD. 29/12/2007 MADE BY THE BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. IN THE MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE RECEIPT EVIDENCING SUBMISSION OF APPLICATION BY THE PETITIONER IN RESPONSE TO EXT.P.1. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE SSLC CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER DTD. 30/03/1995. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY EXAMINATION CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DT. 06/06/1997. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE MARK LIST DTD. 02/05/2001 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FOR THE HONORS DIPLOMA IN NETWORK CENTERED COMPUTING HELD BY THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY IN THE YEAR 2001. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DTD. 10/05/2001 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF MARKS ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE UNIVERSITY OF MADRAS. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE EXPERIENCE CERTIFICATE POSSESSED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE LEASE DEED DTD. 09/01/2008 IN RESPECT OF THE PREMISES HELD BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE SALE DEED DTD. 18/01/2008 EVIDENCING PURCHASE OF NECESSARY LAND FOR HOUSING THE GODOWN IN THE PETITIONER'S NAME. EXT.P.11: COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY MENTIONED IN EXT.P.1. EXT.P.12: COPY OF THE VALUATION REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.13: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DTD. 03/10/2008 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE FEDERAL BANK LTD., KALLETTINKARA BRANCH. EXT.P.14: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DTD. 03/10/2008 ISSUED BY THE DHANALAKSHMI BANK LTD., ALUR BRANCH EVIDENCING THE BALANCE IN THE PETITIONER'S ACCOUNT. EXT.P.15: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DTD. 29/01/2008 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE DHANALAKSHMI BANK LTD., ALUR BRANCH. W.P.(C). NO.30110/2008-H: EXT.P.16: COPY OF THE PROJECT REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.17: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF PHYSICAL FITNESS ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE CIVIL SURGEON, TALUK HOSPITAL, IRINJALAKKUDA. EXT.P.18: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 11/09/2008 ISSUED BY THE R.3. TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.19: COPY OF THE PASS ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. EXT.P.20: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 07/10/2008 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE R.5. EXT.P.21: COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT SHOWING DISPATCH OF EXT.P.10 REPRESENTATION TO THE R.5. EXT.P.22: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 13/10/2008 ISSUED BY R.5. TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R2.A: COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT APPLICATION FORM. EXT.R2.B: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 11/09/08 TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.R2.C: COPY OF THE LETTER 13TH OCTOBER, 2008 ISSUED BY THE BPC TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.R2.D: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 28/08/08 TO THE RESPONDENT CORPORATION FROM THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER. EXT.R2.E: COPY OF THE REPLY SENT BY THE R.5. EXT.R2.F: COPY OF THE NOTE TO FILE DTD. 04/10/08 SIGNED BY THE CHAIRMAN AND THE TWO MEMBER OF THE INTERVIEW PANEL. EXT.R6.A: COPY OF THE EMPANELLED LIST. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. V.GIRI, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.30110 of 2008 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of April, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner responded to Ext.P1 notification issued by the 2nd respondent for appointing a domestic LPG dealer at Chazhoor in Thrissur District. Column 9 of the application, as evidenced by Ext.R2(a) deals with the educational qualification of the applicant. The petitioner had completed the course in Bachelor in Computer Applications in the year 2001, but had not passed the examinations. She had, therefore, indicated that she had participated in the course B.C.A and that she had completed the course. She did not indicate that she had passed. Ext.P7 statement of marks awarded to the petitioner was enclosed along with the application. This is admitted by the respondents in the statement filed by them. 2. By Ext.P18, the petitioner was asked to produce the degree certificate and intimated that if she W.P.(C).No.30110 of 2008 :: 2 :: does not do so, the same will result in rejection of her application. The petitioner went for the interview, at which time, according to her, she had conveyed that she had only completed the course, but did not pass the same. She further refers to Ext.P7 in this regard. By Ext.P22 which came to be issued after institution of this writ petition, she was informed that she had given a false representation in her application that she had successfully completed B.C.A and had obtained a degree, that this information turned out to be false and therefore, her application was liable to be rejected. Ext.P22 has also been challenged in this writ petition. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed by respondents 2 to 5 and by the 6th respondent, the person, who has been now tentatively selected by the selection committee. 4. I heard Sri.K.S.Bharathan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.N.N.Sugunapalan for respondents 2 to 5 and Mr.Reghuraj, learned counsel for the 6th respondent. W.P.(C).No.30110 of 2008 :: 3 :: 5. The reason given in Ext.P22 in support of the rejection of the petitioner's application does not seem to be sustainable. A perusal of Ext.R2(a) will show that the petitioner did not make a specific claim that she had passed B.C.A course. But, I agree with the learned counsel for the 6th respondent and by the learned Senior Counsel, that the petitioner could have avoided a reference to the same. Completion of a course would not have helped the petitioner to secure any marks. It is only if she had acquired a degree that she was entitled to be awarded marks for such additional qualifications. 6. In the light of the fact that the petitioner had enclosed Ext.P7 statement of marks, which shows that she had only completed the course, I am in agreement with the learned counsel for the petitioner that the instant case is one where the petitioner had been ill-advised. In these circumstances, I think, it is appropriate that the petitioner also be interviewed. 7. Learned senior counsel submits that selection has already been completed, though the award W.P.(C).No.30110 of 2008 :: 4 :: of distributorship is kept pending, on account of the interim order passed by this court. The 6th respondent has been selected tentatively and the marks obtained by him is significantly higher than the next person. I do not propose to interfere with the selection of the 6th respondent. But, I am of the view that the petitioner should also be interviewed. If, in the interview the marks awarded to the petitioner is lower than what has already been secured by the 6th respondent, then obviously the selection does not require any change. If after interview the marks secured by the petitioner is higher than that already secured by the 6th respondent, then a review of the declaration of the results might be necessary. That is a matter for respondents 2 to 5. 8. Accordingly, Ext.P22 is quashed. The 2nd respondent shall interview the petitioner also, in the matter of appointment of LPG Distributor at Chazhoor in Thrissur District. The result of the petitioner's participation shall be intimated to her, after completion of the interview. The actual award of the distributorship W.P.(C).No.30110 of 2008 :: 5 :: to the selected candidate shall be kept in abeyance till the petitioner is interviewed and the results are finally declared by the selection board. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy//