IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 21399 of 2010(Y)
1. JACOB.A.J, JUNIOR SUPERINTENDENT,
... Petitioner
2. K.LEELA,DEPUTY TAHSILDAR,
3. ANANDAN R., DEPUTY TAHSILDAR(HOUSING)
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE,
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE
4. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,
For Petitioner :SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :09/07/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
================
W.P.(C) NO. 21399 OF 2010 (Y)
=====================
Dated this the 9th day of July, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P7, by which
the 1st respondent has rejected Ext.P6 representation submitted
by the 3rd petitioner claiming exemption from passing Criminal
Judicial Test for the purpose of promotion to the post of Tahsildar.
2. Facts of the case are that the petitioners are Deputy
Tahsildars aspiring for promotion to the post of Tahsildars. As per
the Special Rules, one of the qualification is pass in Criminal
Judicial Test, which admittedly the petitioners have not passed.
However, they claim exemption on the strength of Rule 13 A of
the General Rules.
3. This issue was raised by several persons including the
third petitioner before this Court. The issue was finally decided by
a Division bench in Ext.P3 judgment where it was held that pass
in Criminal Judicial Test is a basic qualification, which cannot be
exempted under Rule 13A of the General Rules. Against the said
judgment, petitioners had filed an SLP before the Apex Court.
While the SLP was pending, according to the petitioners, the PSC
WPC No. 21399/10
:2 :
issued Ext.P4 stating that pass in Criminal Judicial Test is a special
qualification, to which Rule 13A applies. According to the
petitioners, in order to claim exemption on the strength of Ext.P4,
they sought withdrawal of the SLP and accordingly, by Ext.P5
order, the SLP was dismissed as withdrawn. Thereafter, they
submitted Ext.P6 representation claiming exemption from passing
Criminal Judicial Test on the strength of Rule 13 A of the General
Rules. However, by Ext.P7, the Government rejected the request
for exemption on the basis that pass in the Criminal Judicial Test
is a basic qualification. It is in these circumstances, the writ
petition is filed challenging Ext.P7.
4. Irrespective of the fact that PSC has taken a different
view, fact remains that, as at present, the law laid down by a
Division Bench of this Court in Ext.P3 judgment that pass in
Criminal Judicial Test is a basic qualification, which cannot be
exempted under Rule 13 A of the General Rules, holds the field. If
the said law governs the field, the view taken by the Government
in Ext.P7 cannot be faulted.
Therefore, the writ petition is only to be dismissed and I do
so.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp