IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C) No. 15630 of 2006(I) 1. BINESH.E. S/O.BHASKARAN NAIR, ... Petitioner 2. RTHEESH.K. S/O.THEYYUTTY.K. 3. KISHORE M.V. S/O.NARAYANA WARRIER, Vs 1. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, ... Respondent 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE For Petitioner :SRI.BENOY THOMAS For Respondent : No Appearance The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER Dated :04/07/2006 O R D E R A.K. Basheer, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C) NO. 15630 of 2006 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 4th day of July , 2006. J U D G M E N T
The short question that arises for consideration in this writ
petition is whether the Kerala Public Service Commission (for short,
the Commission) is justified in awarding weightage for marks
obtained by the candidates in their Masters’ Degree examination while
they are being considered for selection to the post of Higher
Secondary School Teachers in Vocational Higher Secondary Schools.
The other issue is whether awarding of more than 20% of the marks
in the written examination for interview is justifiable?
2. Petitioners had responded to Exts.P1 and P1(a) notifications
issued by the Commission inviting applications from eligible
candidates for appointment to the post of Higher Secondary School
Teacher (Senior and Junior) and also Non Vocational Teachers in
Vocational Higher Secondary Schools. According to the petitioners,
they have obtained more than 50% marks in their Master’s Degree
examination. They have also obtained other requisite qualifications.
But it is contended by the petitioners that the Commission is not
justified in awarding weightage for the marks obtained by the
candidates in the Master’s Degree examination, while making selection
to the above posts.
3. It is submitted by the petitioners that those candidates who
have obtained 85% or more marks in the Masters’ Degree examination
are awarded 50 marks as weightage. Weightage is granted in
decreasing order depending on the marks obtained by the candidates.
This, according to the petitioners, is highly arbitrary, illegal and
violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
4. Yet another contention raised by the petitioners is that the
Commission is not justified in awarding 30% marks for the interview.
Only 20% marks could have been set apart for interview.
Learned Standing Counsel for the Commission submits that the
issue is squarely covered against the petitioner in the decision rendered
by a Division Bench of this Court in Mohan v. Public Service
Commission (1994 (2) KLT 585) and several other judgments viz.,
W.P.Nos.178/2005, OP.11079/1999 and W.P.26618/2005 etc.
6. Obviously the weightage that the petitioners got on the basis
of the marks obtained by them in their Masters’ Degree examination
might have been less. Petitioners do not have a case that they have
been denied weightage. But their grievance is that other candidates
who obtained higher marks in their Post Graduate examination were
given more weightage. Understandably those candidates who secured
more marks will definitely get a higher weightage. Petitioners cannot
grudge that. Significantly petitioners do not have a case that they have
been denied weightage at all. Similarly, marks fixed for interview for
all candidates is admittedly uniform. In that view of the matter, the
contentions raised by the petitioners are totally misconceived and
There is no merit in the writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed.
WP.15630/06 3 A.K. Basheer Judge. an.