IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2010 / 28TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 2838 of 2010(D) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- SHYJA M., CHAMBAVANKANDY, CHELAMBRA P.O. MALAPPURAM, SECRETARY, RAMANATTUKARA, PANCHAYATH SCHEDULED CASTE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD NO.D 2416,RAMANANTTUKARA, KOZHIKODE. BY ADVS. MR.P.P.JACOB, MR.T.P.GOPAKUMAR. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, DISTRICT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT OFFICER. 2. THE KERALA PUBLIC SRVICE COMMISSION, PATTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. THE KOZHIKODE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK, KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER. 4. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (G), KOZHIKODE. R1 & R2 BY ADV. MR. ALEXANDER THOMAS, SC, KPSC R3 BY ADV. MR. P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/03/2010 ALONG WITH WPC.NO.2839 OF 2010, WPC.NO. 2959 OF 2010 AND WPC.NO.8709 OF 2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) Nos.2838, 2839, 2959 and 8709 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT These writ petitions are disposed of together for the reason that identical questions are raised for consideration in all the cases. 2. The petitioners in all these Writ Petitions are working in member societies which are affiliated to the Kozhikode District Co-operative Bank. They had submitted applications for selection and appointment to the post of Clerk/Cashier. They had appeared for a written test and were included in the short list published by the Commission. However, they were not included in the final list on the ground that three years have not elapsed since the Societies in which they were working had got affiliation. According to the petitioners, what is necessary is only that the petitioners should have been working in the member societies for a period of three years. It is not necessary for the societies to have been affiliated for a period of three years as stipulated by the wpc No.2838/2010 & conn.cases 2 Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the 'Commission' for short). Therefore, according to the petitioners, non-inclusion of their names in the final list is without any justification. 3. An affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Commission. It has been stated in paragraph-2 of the affidavit as follows: “It is most respectfully submitted that the Commission has decided that experience certificate furnished from Co-operative service banks pertaining to periods before their affiliation to the District Co-operative Banks are also acceptable for selection to the post of Clerk/Cashier in such District Co-operative Banks. It is thus respectfully submitted that experience/service certificates furnished by candidates showing that they have the prescribed minimum three years experience in such primary/members of Co-operative Societies in periods prior to their affiliation with the District Co-operative Bank are acceptable and that the Co-operative Society concerned need not have three years' affiliation with the District Co-operative Bank as on the last date of submission of application to the P.S.C., but that such Co- operative Societies should have affiliation with the District Co-operative Bank as on the last date prescribed for receipt of application by the candidate to the PSC for the above selection.” 4. In view of the above statement in the counter wpc No.2838/2010 & conn.cases 3 affidavit, it is submitted that the Commission has also issued an addendum notification dated 18.2.2010 including the names of the petitioners also in the final list. In view of the above, no further orders are necessary in these Writ Petitions. 5. In W.P.(C) No.8709/2010, though the petitioners were included in the final list published by the Commission also, they have not been advised because of the interim order passed in the other three cases making the advice subject to further orders of this Court. Since the Commission has accepted the position that the petitioners are eligible to be advised, these Writ Petitions can be disposed of directing advice to be made in accordance with law. 6. In the above circumstances, these Writ petitions are disposed of directing the Commission to advise appointments pursuant to the final list published by them as modified by the addendum notification, according to the availability of vacancies, in accordance with law. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE css/