High Court Kerala High Court

Padmanabhan K.V. vs Director Of Public Instruction on 6 October, 2010

Kerala High Court
Padmanabhan K.V. vs Director Of Public Instruction on 6 October, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 30155 of 2010(T)


1. PADMANABHAN K.V., AGED 44 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. VIJAYAN.P., AGED 46 YEARS,

                        Vs



1. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,
                       ...       Respondent

2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,

3. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,

4. DISTRICT OFFICER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.V.AMARESAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

 Dated :06/10/2010

 O R D E R
                       K.T.SANKARAN, J.
                  ---------------------------------------------
                   W.P.(C).No.30155 of 2010
                  ---------------------------------------------
             Dated this the 6th day of October, 2010



                            JUDGMENT

The Kerala Public Service Commission, as per notification

dated 12.6.2007, invited applications for the post of High School

Assistant (Malayalam). The last date for submitting the

application was 18.7.2007. The petitioners applied as per the

notification. They appeared for the written test. Notices were

issued to the petitioners to appear for verification of the

documents and also for the interview on 18th and 19th August,

2010.

2. The case of the petitioners is that on verification of

the records, one of the members of the PSC stated that the

petitioners did not have the required qualification, namely, B.Ed.

in Malayalam. Accordingly, the petitioners were not allowed to

participate in the interview. According to the petitioners, the

notification did not insist that the training qualification should be

in the subject concerned. It is contended that Ext.P3 notification,

namely, G.O.(P) No.160/09/G.Edn. dated 4.8.2009 stipulating

WPC No.30155/2010 2

that for the post of High School Assistant (Languages), the

candidates should have acquired B.Ed. in the subject concerned,

operates only prospectively and that when the notification issued

by the Public Service Commission did not insist B.Ed. Degree in

the subject concerned, Ext.P3, which was issued subsequently,

could not be applied.

3. The Standing Counsel for the Kerala Public Service

Commission produced a copy of the notification dated 12.6.2007

issued by he Kerala Public Service Commission for the post of

High School Assistant (Malayalam). Copy of the notification is

taken on record. Note 2 in the notification clearly provides that

the B.Ed Degree should be in the subject concerned, namely,

Malayalam. The petitioners have not produced the notification

along with the Writ Petition. They raised a contention that the

notification issued by the PSC did not stipulate that B.Ed. Degree

should be in the subject concerned. This contention put forward

by the petitioners is falsified by the production of a copy of the

notification by the Standing Counsel for PSC. It would appear

that there was suppression of material facts. Normally, when

material facts are suppressed, the Writ Petition would be liable

WPC No.30155/2010 3

to be dismissed with costs. However, since the petitioners

applied for the post, appeared for the written test and, were

under the hope of getting a job, I do not think that I should

impose costs on the Writ Petitioners.

For the aforesaid reasons, the Writ Petition is dismissed.

K.T.SANKARAN,
JUDGE
csl