IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2009 / 8TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 37979 of 2008(U) PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. SOSU ALEX, D/O.ALEX MANI, AGED 22, MANGALATHHOUSE, ACHELPETTY PO. VIA.PAMPAKUDA-686667. 2. SAJATH.P.S., S./O.SATHAR.P.S., AGED 22, SEYK EDRGM N.C.C.ROAD, CHERTHALA. THURAVOOR PO., PIN-688 532. 3. GIREESH GEORGE, S/O.GEORGE P.TOM AGED 23 MAMMANTTEDOM, PULINCHUNNU PO., ALAPPUZHA. 4. FELICIA VINITA FRANCIS, D/O.FELICIAN FRANCIS, AGED 22, LIG-1, FORT NAGAR, COCHIN, ERNAKULAM-682001. 5. VEENA.K.V., D/O.P.K.VIJAYAN, AGED 27 VEWES NILAYAM, KARAKKAD PO., CHENGANNUR ALAPPUZHA,PIN-689504. BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR SRI.MANOJ P.KUNJACHAN SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE SRI.S.VAIDYANATHAN RESPONDENT(S): 1. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION TRIVANDRUM, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. KERALA STAQTE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VAIDYUTHY BHAVAN PATTOM, TRIVANDRUM. 3. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM, REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR. ADV. SRI. ALEXANDER THOMAS - R1 ADV. SRI. K.S.ANIL -R2 ADV. SRI. T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/01/2009, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 38220 OF 2008. THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) Nos:37979 & 38220 of 2008 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Both the writ petitions are disposed of by a common judgment as the issues raised are the same. 2. The petitioners are holders of Degree of Bachelor of Technology under Electrical and Electronics Branch. They have passed in First Class with distinction at the examination held in July, 2007 conducted by the Mahatma Gandhi University. The results were published on 26.09.2007. 3. They applied for the post of Assistant Engineer (Electrical) which was notified by the Kerala State Electricity Board as per Ext.P6. The last date for submitting the application was 5.9.2007. The qualification prescribed was degree in Electrical Engineering or degree in Electrical and Electronics or its equivalent or such other qualification as prescribed. 4. Since the petitioners were expecting the results they applied for selection and appointment to the post of Assistant Engineer (Electrical). They were issued admission ticket by the PSC and subsequently they have passed the written test and were invited for participation in the interview held on wpc:37979 of 2008 2 18.12.2008. When they produced degree certificates, the first respondent raised an objection that the results were published on 26.09.2007 and they were not qualified on the last date of submitting the application. i.e. 5.09.2007. 5. The petitioners contended for the position that the date on which they appeared in the examination alone is crucial and the degree that has been awarded to them will relate back to the said date. To get a certificate to that effect they approached the University for production before the PSC. Because of the delay that has occurred in the matter, they have filed this writ petition for the various reliefs. 6. The University has filed a statement to the effect that the petitioners are eligible for the degree of B.Tech only from 26.9.2007 i.e., the date of declaration of result of the final semester B.Tech examination held in July, 2007. It is therefore pointed out that the petitioners are not eligible to apply for the post of Assistant Engineer as on 5.9.2007, unless it was otherwise specifically provided in the notification that the candidates who are awaiting the results are also eligible to apply for the post. The stand taken by the University is that the objection taken by the PSC is in accordance with law. It is also wpc:37979 of 2008 3 stated that the petitioners are not eligible to be the holders of the degree of B.Tech as on the last date of application for the post. It is well settled that qualification required, should be satisfied as on the last date for submitting the application. Hence, admittedly, as petitioners have obtained the degree as on the said date, they were not eligible to apply. 7. In that view of the matter, the Kerala Public Service Commission cannot be found fault with in not considering the names of the petitioners for inclusion in the ranked list. The writ petition is dismissed. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE bps