IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 8594 of 2009(T)
1. NINEESHA NIRMALAN, AGED 26 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. THE SECRETARY, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE
For Petitioner :SRI.K.RAVIKUMAR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
Dated :06/04/2009
O R D E R
T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J
--------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 8594 of 2009
---------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 6th day of April, 2009
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is an applicant to the post of Medical
Officer/Insurance Medical Officer (Homeo). She appeared for
the written test held on 6.10.2007 and again she was required to
appear for verifying the documents on 13.2.2009. She produced
all documents on that day. She acquired the qualification from a
University in Maharashtra. It is evidenced as Ext.P6. She was
originally having the registration with the Maharashtra Council
of Homeopathy under the Mumbai Hoemopathic Practioners
Act, 1959. It is evidenced as Ext.P3.
2. She secured registration in Kerala as per Registration
No.8392 dated 24.12.2008 issued under the Travancore Cochin
Medical Practioners Act, 1953. It is evidenced as Ext.P7. The
petitioner seeks for a direction to consider her candidature in
the light of the registration obtained as above.
3. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents it is
pointed out that as per the Notification the last date for receipt
of the application was on 02.05.2007 which was extended to
9.05.2007 and one of the requirements is that the candidate
wpc/8594/2009
2
should have `A’ class Registration with the Registrar of Medical
Council, Kerala. Ext.P7 certificate does not satisfy the conditions
provided in the Notification. It is pointed out that unless the
candidate possess the said qualification as on the last date for
the receipt of application, the candidate will stand disqualified.
As per Ext.P7, the Registration was obtained by the petitioner
under the relevant Act only on 24.12.2008, which is much after
the last date for receipt of application i.e.9.5.2007.
4. Going by the settled legal positions declared by the
various decisions of this Court and Apex Court, a candidate
should possess the qualification as on the last date for receipt of
the application. The petitioner is not a duly qualified candidate
for the selection to the above post. In that view of the matter, the
petitioner is not entitled for the relief sought for in the Writ
Petition.
The Writ Petition is dismissed.
T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,
JUDGE
bps