High Court Kerala High Court

Siby M.C vs Kerala Public Service Commission on 3 April, 2007

Kerala High Court
Siby M.C vs Kerala Public Service Commission on 3 April, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA No. 888 of 2007()


1. SIBY M.C.,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,
                       ...       Respondent

2. UNDER SECRETARY,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.A.RAJAGOPALAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, KPSC

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :03/04/2007

 O R D E R
                 P.R.RAMAN & ANTONY DOMINIC, JJ.

                 ========================

                          W.A.NO. 888 OF 2007

                   ======================

                 Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2007


                               J U D G M E N T

P.R.Raman, J.

The appellant/petitioner was an aspirant for the post of

Reserve Driver in the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation. He

responded to Ext.P3 application issued by the Kerala Public Service

Commission. He was removed from the short list against which he

preferred the original petition.

2. The learned Single Judge found that the petitioner was

not able to satisfy that he possess the requisite qualification as on

the date of Ext.P3 and hence dismissed the original petition against

which the present appeal is preferred.

3. The counsel appearing for the appellant would submit

that the reason for rejection of his application from being

considered is that he has not completed seven years after obtaining

an LMV licence and that he was issued with LMV licence on 21/11/99

and the last date for receipt of the application was on 31/1/05. It is

his contention that as per item 7 of Ext.P3 notification, the

qualification prescribed does not specifically refer to seven years

experience after obtaining an LMV licence. According to the

WA 888/2007

: 2 :

appellant, it merely says that the candidate should be a person

having a driving licence and the appellant is having an

autorickshaw driving licence. Subsequently, LMV licence was also

obtained on 1999. Therefore his experience after obtaining an

autorickshaw driving licence is sufficient qualification as

prescribed. We cannot agree. The post to which applications are

invited is Reserve Drivers post in the Public Transport

Corporation. Necessarily the Driver should possess necessary

experience to drive the heavy duty vehicle pursuant to post

qualification experience after obtaining the LMV licence. Merely

because the appellant possess a driving licence for driving a three

wheeler is not what is intended by the notification prescribed in

the qualification as per item 7 as noticed above. The view taken

by the learned Single Judge being a plausible view, we do not

think we could interfere with such finding.

In the circumstances, we find no merit in the writ appeal.

Dismissed.

P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE.

Rp