Rincy. S.Das vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 23 May, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA.No. 366 of 2008()


1. RINCY. S.DAS, W/O.ALEXIS, 19/565
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES

3. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

4. THE DISTRICT OFFICER

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.DEEPAK

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN

 Dated :23/05/2008

 O R D E R
                   J.B.KOSHY & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ.
                        --------------------------------------
                          W.A.No.366 OF 2008
                        -------------------------------------
                          Dated 23rd May, 2008

                                 JUDGMENT

Koshy,J.

Appellant/petitioner belongs to Christian Nadar community.

She applied for appointment to the post of Staff Nurse Grade II in the

Health Department in Palakkad District. She was included in the short

list published by the Public Service Commission in the supplementary list

of OBC candidates. She claimed reservation under SIUC, but, later it

turned out that she was Nadar Christian, but, that was not specifically

stated. The community certificate Ext.P4 shows that she belongs to

Christian Nadar SIUC. In Ext.P2 application it is specifically stated as

Christian SIUC (OBC) in view of Ext.R3(a) notification. As per the

Government norms, Nadars (Hindu) and SIUC other than Nadars are

separate categories and in Ext.R3(a) notification a mistake was

committed by the Public Service Commission as only Nadars (Hindu)

(item 43) and SIUC (item 57) were shown and Christians Nadar was not

separately shown. In subsequent notification Nadar (Hindu) and

Christians are stated separately by Annexure AII. Because of the

omission in notification regarding the scheduled enlistment of OBC

communities, petitioner cannot suffer. Petitioner has correctly

W.A.366/2008 2

shown the caste and certificate was produced and she is eligible for

reservation under OBC community. Exclusion of her name in the rank

list due to mistake committed by PSC in the notification is not correct.

In the above circumstances, we direct the Public Service Commission

to include her name in Ext.P5 rank list and give advice as per her

turn.

The appeal is allowed.

J.B.KOSHY
JUDGE

P.N.RAVINDRAN
JUDGE

tks