Smitha Karunan vs Kerala Public Service Commission on 3 April, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 6430 of 2009(W)


1. SMITHA KARUNAN,HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SECRETARY,TECHNICAL EDUCATION

                For Petitioner  :SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI

                For Respondent  :SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS,SC,KPSC

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN

 Dated :03/04/2009

 O R D E R
                           P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
                      -------------------------------------
                        W.P.(C).No.6430 of 2009
                      --------------------------------------
                          Dated 3rd April, 2009

                                JUDGMENT

Heard Smt.Sumathi Dandapani, the learned Senior Advocate

appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Alexander Thomas, the learned

Standing Counsel appearing for the Kerala Public Service Commission.

2. The petitioner was an applicant for appointment to the

post of Lecturer in Computer Science and Engineering. She belongs to

the Ezhava community. She was selected and included in Ext.P5 ranked

list published on 14.10.2008, by Ext.P8 Addendum Notification published

on 2.12.2008. The rank assigned to the petitioner is Rank No.32 A. The

petitioner challenges the rank assigned to her in the ranked list

contending that her merit was not properly assessed and only six marks

were awarded to her in the interview. In this writ petition, the petitioner

prays for quashing the interview proceedings which led to the publication

of Ext.P5 ranked list.

3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Kerala

Public Service Commission had made available the mark list containing

the marks secured by all candidates who appeared for the interview. It

discloses that the petitioner was awarded only six months in the

interview. Though the petitioner has alleged that due to extraneous

WP(C).No.6430/2009 2

considerations she was awarded low marks, there is no material in

support of the said contention. No reason is stated as to why the

Interview Committee was prompted to award low marks to the

petitioner. Further, the petitioner has not chosen to join any of the

candidates included in Ext.P5 ranked list as amended by Ext.P8, as

parties to this writ petition. In these circumstances, no relief can be

granted to the petitioner.

The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.

P.N.RAVINDRAN
Judge

TKS