{"id":207230,"date":"2009-01-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-12-31T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009"},"modified":"2016-12-22T19:18:27","modified_gmt":"2016-12-22T13:48:27","slug":"betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009","title":{"rendered":"Betty P.S. vs Kerala Public Service Commission on 1 January, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Betty P.S. vs Kerala Public Service Commission on 1 January, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 14781 of 2008(I)\n\n\n1. BETTY P.S., W\/O. M.K.SUBRAMANIAN,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.B.GOPAKUMAR\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS,SC,KPSC\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC\n\n Dated :01\/01\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                         ANTONY DOMINIC, J.\n                         ==============\n                W.P.(C) NOS. 14781 & 28499 OF 2008\n              =========================\n\n               Dated this the 1st day of January, 2009\n\n                             J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
      In these writ petitions, the challenge raised is regarding the<\/p>\n
correctness of the application of the rules of reservation as provided in the<\/p>\n
KS & SSR. The post of Lecturer in Sanskrit (General) in the Collegiate<\/p>\n
Education Service is filled up in terms of the Special Rules for Kerala<\/p>\n
Collegiate Education Service, 1994. According to the petitioners, 9<\/p>\n
vacancies were reported to the PSC and the PSC issued notification inviting<\/p>\n
applications for filling up the vacancies on 29\/6\/2004. Rank list was<\/p>\n
published on 26\/12\/2006.\n<\/p>\n
      2.    Petitioner in WP(C) No.14781\/08 was included at Rank No.19<\/p>\n
of the ranked list and the petitioners in WP(C) No.28499\/08 were included<\/p>\n
at rank Nos.20 and 21. All these petitioners are candidates belonging to<\/p>\n
Ezhava community. According to the petitioners, there were 27 vacancies<\/p>\n
reported by the 2nd respondent and although candidates were advised,<\/p>\n
despite the fact that they had secured rank Nos. 19, 20 and 21, they were<\/p>\n
not advised for appointment. Petitioners state that the reason for not<\/p>\n
advising them is that the 3rd respondent was not working out the rotation<\/p>\n
correctly.\n<\/p>\n
WPC 14781 & 28499\/08<\/p>\n
                                       :2 :<\/span><\/p>\n
       3.     It is stated that the main rotation started at MRI 31 and out of<\/p>\n
the 27 vacancies reported, 9 vacancies are set apart for issuing fresh<\/p>\n
notifications.   It is contended that there is only one post reserved for<\/p>\n
Dheevara out of every 100 post, Dheevara has already been<\/p>\n
accommodated at MRI 22(LC) on 16\/1\/2003 and therefore MRI 50, the<\/p>\n
Dheevara turn, cannot be reserved any more and that MRI 50 must be<\/p>\n
given to Ezhava in the absence of LC candidate. They also state that<\/p>\n
against MRI 12(SC), an Ezhava candidate was erroneously accommodated<\/p>\n
on 29\/1\/82. It is stated that although MRI 14 (Ezhava) has been given to<\/p>\n
Viswakarma, according to the 3rd respondent, MRI 54 (Ezhava) cannot be<\/p>\n
given to Ezhava as MRI 12 has been given to Ezhava. It is stated that if at<\/p>\n
all such adjustment is necessary, it is the Viswakarma turn which should<\/p>\n
be given to SC and not that of Ezhava. The petitioners also contended<\/p>\n
that MRI 28 was given to open competition candidate on 16\/1\/2003, but<\/p>\n
the said adjustment has not been remedied so far although there are<\/p>\n
atleast 3 candidates now presently available in the ranked list. On this<\/p>\n
basis, it is contended that petitioners were not advised on account of the<\/p>\n
fact that the 3rd respondent was not applying the rules of rotation in the<\/p>\n
WPC 14781 & 28499\/08<\/p>\n
                                       :3 :<\/span><\/p>\n
proper manner.\n<\/p>\n
     4.     PSC has filed a counter affidavit. According to the PSC, at the<\/p>\n
time of finalisation of the ranked list on 26\/12\/2006, NCA turns were<\/p>\n
pending to be compensated. According to the PSC, the turn which was<\/p>\n
pending to be compensated by Ezhava Community was for MRI 12 (SC)<\/p>\n
advised on 29\/1\/82. PSC submits that the rotation for the post started at<\/p>\n
MRI 31(OC), while working out the rotation of 23 vacancies, there arose<\/p>\n
two Ezhava turns at MRI 34 and 42 and that as there was no SC candidate<\/p>\n
in the ranked list pending to be advised against MRI 12, without<\/p>\n
compensating the same, two Ezhava candidates at Rank Nos.16 and 17<\/p>\n
were advised for appointment against MRI 34 and 42. PSC says that in<\/p>\n
view of the amendment to the rules of reservation by notification dated<\/p>\n
8\/3\/2006, if suitable candidates are not available from any particular<\/p>\n
community or group of communities, such vacancy shall be kept unfilled<\/p>\n
and notified separately for selection. Therefore, when MRI 54 (Ezhava)<\/p>\n
arose for appointment, that turn had to be compensated to MRI 12(SC)<\/p>\n
advised on 29\/1\/82. Therefore, PSC states that the vacancy set apart for<\/p>\n
separate notification is to be filled up from SC candidates.<\/p>\n
WPC 14781 & 28499\/08<\/p>\n
                                    :4 :<\/span><\/p>\n
       5.   In so far as the advise made against MRI 12 is concerned, it is<\/p>\n
stated that on account of the absence of SC candidate, a candidate<\/p>\n
belonging to Ezhava community was advised on 29\/1\/82 and extra benefit<\/p>\n
was derived to the Ezhava Community. According to the PSC, since there<\/p>\n
was no SC candidate in the ranked list, SC vacancy was not compensated<\/p>\n
and hence the NCA vacancy arose. It is also stated that against MRI 14<\/p>\n
(Ezhava), on account of the absence of Ezhava candidate in the ranked<\/p>\n
list, a Viswakarma candidate was advised on 29\/1\/82 and thus MRI 14<\/p>\n
(Ezhava) occurred as a NCA vacancy. However, PSC proceeds to state<\/p>\n
that MRI 20(Viswakarma) was compensated to Ezhava Community on<\/p>\n
12\/8\/92.\n<\/p>\n
       6.   Answering the allegation of the petitioners that even if<\/p>\n
adjustments were made in 1982, when ranked lists were finalised in 1985<\/p>\n
and 2003, compensation ought to have been made, PSC contends that<\/p>\n
after 1982, SC candidates were not available in the subsequent ranked lists<\/p>\n
to compensate the extra benefit derived by Ezhava community, which is<\/p>\n
now to be compensated against MRI 54 (Ezhava).          In so far as the<\/p>\n
contention of the petitioners that MRI 28(Ezhava) filled up by an open<\/p>\n
WPC 14781 & 28499\/08<\/p>\n
                                     :5 :<\/span><\/p>\n
competition candidate has to be compensated, PSC submits that the right<\/p>\n
of restoration or compensation shall not extend to a case where selection<\/p>\n
has gone to open competition candidate.\n<\/p>\n
      7.     Admittedly,   the   rules   of   reservation  have   undergone<\/p>\n
amendment and if candidate belonging to the specified category is not<\/p>\n
available, unlike in the past, there is no temporary pass over and the<\/p>\n
vacancies are set apart, re notified and filled up in the manner as provided<\/p>\n
in the rules. If against MRI 12, the Ezhava community has derived extra<\/p>\n
benefit, necessarily that will have to be compensated, and if so, PSC<\/p>\n
cannot be faulted for setting apart MRI 54 (Ezhava) to be compensated by<\/p>\n
a SC candidate. Similarly, the rules of reservation also do not permit the<\/p>\n
compensation, when reserved vacancies are filled up by open competition<\/p>\n
candidate. However, the petitioners contention that a Dheevara candidate<\/p>\n
has already been appointed and therefore, there cannot be any further<\/p>\n
reservation in their favour, is not answered by PSC in the affidavit filed.<\/p>\n
This necessarily is a matter that the PSC shall examine and if necessary,<\/p>\n
the PSC shall take such correction steps, as is permissible in law.<\/p>\n
      8.     Therefore, on the facts, it can be seen that the PSC has<\/p>\n
WPC 14781 & 28499\/08<\/p>\n
                                     :6 :<\/span><\/p>\n
satisfactorily answered the plea raised by the petitioners that the PSC has<\/p>\n
not followed the rules of rotation in the proper manner except in the case<\/p>\n
of the Dheevara candidate.\n<\/p>\n
      Therefore, the writ petitions are disposed of directing the PSC to<\/p>\n
examine the case of the petitioners regarding the reservation provided for<\/p>\n
Dheevara candidate and take corrective steps in that regard.<\/p>\n
                                             ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
\nRp<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Betty P.S. vs Kerala Public Service Commission on 1 January, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 14781 of 2008(I) 1. BETTY P.S., W\/O. M.K.SUBRAMANIAN, … Petitioner Vs 1. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.B.GOPAKUMAR For Respondent :SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS,SC,KPSC The Hon’ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC Dated […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-207230","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nBetty P.S. vs Kerala Public Service Commission on 1 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Betty P.S. vs Kerala Public Service Commission on 1 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-12-31T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-12-22T13:48:27+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Betty P.S. vs Kerala Public Service Commission on 1 January, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-12-22T13:48:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1062,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009\",\"name\":\"Betty P.S. vs Kerala Public Service Commission on 1 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-12-22T13:48:27+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Betty P.S. vs Kerala Public Service Commission on 1 January, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Betty P.S. vs Kerala Public Service Commission on 1 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Betty P.S. vs Kerala Public Service Commission on 1 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-12-31T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-12-22T13:48:27+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Betty P.S. vs Kerala Public Service Commission on 1 January, 2009","datePublished":"2008-12-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-12-22T13:48:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009"},"wordCount":1062,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009","name":"Betty P.S. vs Kerala Public Service Commission on 1 January, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-12-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-12-22T13:48:27+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/betty-p-s-vs-kerala-public-service-commission-on-1-january-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Betty P.S. vs Kerala Public Service Commission on 1 January, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/207230","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=207230"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/207230\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=207230"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=207230"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=207230"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}