IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 24856 of 2008(H)
1. MAHIMA M. RAJ, D/O. MADHURA RAJ,
... Petitioner
2. NANDINI.H, D/O. P. HARIHARAN,
Vs
1. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,
... Respondent
2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO
For Petitioner :SRI.SUBAL J.PAUL
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :17/09/2008
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
--------------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) 24856 of 2008
--------------------------------------------------------
Dated: SEPTEMBER 17, 2008
JUDGMENT
The 1st respondent had invited applications for the
post of Lecturer in Government Law Colleges. The
qualifications prescribed as per Ext.P5 are the following:-
“(1) Degree of Master of Law with at least 55%
marks.
(2) Experience at the Bar for a period of not less
than 3 years.
(3) Must have passed a comprehensive test in the
concerned subject specifically conducted for the
purpose by UGC or any agency duly constituted by the
State Government in this behalf. When qualifications
are equal, preference shall be given to candidates who
possess adequate knowledge in Malayalam.”
2. Though the petitioners claim that they satisfy Sl.
Nos.1 and 2 above, admittedly, they do not possess the
qualification at Sl.No.3. Therefore they are ineligible as
WP(C) 24856/08
2
per Ext.P5. It is in this circumstance this writ petition is
filed seeking to quash the qualification in Sl.No.3 which,
according to the petitioners, is unnecessary.
3. In my view, the necessity or otherwise of a
qualification for recruitment is a matter for the employer to
decide. As far as this Court is concerned, this Court need
only consider whether in fixing the qualification, there is
any element of arbitrariness or anything isolating the
fundamental rights of any one of the applicants. Apart from
the plea that the objectionable prescription is unnecessary,
petitioners have not demonstrated that there is any
arbitrariness or anything in isolation of the fundamental
rights. If that be so, there is no substance in the writ
petition.
This writ petition is only to be dismissed and I do so.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
mt/-