Posted On by &filed under High Court, Kerala High Court.


Kerala High Court
Hemalatha P.A. vs State Of Kerala on 20 December, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 3037 of 2008(J)


1. HEMALATHA P.A., D/O APPU M.K.,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY

3. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,

4. THE SECRETARY,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.N.RAGHURAJ

                For Respondent  :SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS,SC,KPSC

The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

 Dated :20/12/2010

 O R D E R
                   T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J.
                     -------------------------------------
                     W.P.(C)No.3037 Of 2008
               -----------------------------------------------------
       DATED THIS THE 20th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2010

                                 J U D G M E N T

The petitioner possesses Post Graduate Degree in Sociology

with first class and second rank from the Calicut University. She

is having B.Ed.in Natural Science. Pursuant to the application

invited for the post of Higher Secondary School Teacher,

Sociology (Junior) she applied for the post and was issued the

hall ticket and finally she attended the written test also. She was

included in the short list, namely, supplementary list for

Scheduled Caste Community; but was not considered for the

interview. It is in these circumstances that she has filed this Writ

Petition.

2. Evidently, the petitioner is having B.Ed. in natural

Science.

3. The PSC in its counter affidavit has stated that at the

time of scrutiny of the documents, it was noticed that the

B.Ed.Degree of the petitioner was not in the concerned subject or

faculty. The qualifications possessed by the petitioner was

M.A.Sociology, B.Ed.Natural Science and SET(Sociology). Only

W.P.(C)No.3037/08 -2-

two vacancies were reported in the post. Since sufficient

candidates who possess B.Ed. in the concerned faculty were

available for selection, ranked list was prepared including 62

candidates.

4. Evidently, the qualification prescribed allows persons

having B.Ed. in the concerned subject to be appointed and in the

absence of the same alone, other faculties can be considered. In

that view of the matter, the petitioner is not entitled to succeed

in the matter. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed.

SD/-(T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE)

dsn


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

66 queries in 0.100 seconds.