IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 29439 of 2008(D)
1. INDUSREE.B.R,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF TECHNICAL
3. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,
For Petitioner :SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL)
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :14/11/2008
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J
-----------------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.29439/2008
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 14th day of November, 2008
JUDGMENT
Petitioner submits that he had responded to the
notification issued by the 3rd respondent for filling up the
post of Lecturer in Information Technology. It is stated that,
in the ranked list that has been published, he has been
included at Sl.No.19.
2. Referring to Ext.P2, counsel for the petitioner
submits that, from out of the list 18 OC candidates have
been advised and that if any further vacancies reported,
petitioner is the next candidate to be advised. According to
the petitioner, one of the candidates, ie rank No.18 in
Ext.P2, who was already advised has not joined duty and
therefore there is a NJD vacancy to be reported. It is stated
that the list is to expire on 13.12.2008 and therefore the
WP(c).No.29439/08 2
delay if any caused in this regard will deprive the petitioner
of the chance to get advised.
3. Learned Government Pleader on the other hand
would submit that rank No.18, though advised had initially
sought 45 days joining time and on expiry there of, sought
further extension of 90 days. It is stated that as at present
no decision has been taken on his request and therefore
presently there is no NJD vacancy to be reported to the PSC.
4. From the above it is obvious that, rank No.18 has
not so far joined duty and his request for extension of
joining time is also pending consideration of the authorities.
In the meanwhile, the list is expiring and in the event he
does not ultimately join, even if there occur a vacancy after
the expiry of the list, the petitioner will be loosing his
opportunity.
5. In order to avoid such a situation, I direct that the
second respondent shall report one vacancy to the 3rd
respondent and the 3rd respondent need not advice any
WP(c).No.29439/08 3
candidate in response there to. In the event there occur a
NJD vacancy as contended by the petitioner, on being
intimated of the same, the 3rd respondent shall advice an
eligible candidate against that vacancy.
Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Petitioner shall
produce a copy of the judgment before the 2nd respondent
for compliance.
ANTONY DOMINIC
JUDGE
vi.
WP(c).No.29439/08 4
