ATHIRA LAL Vs. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Original Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the Tribunal on 11.9.2020 in O.A.No.1314/2020.

(2.) By the impugned order, the Tribunal had dismissed the Original Application. The petitioner, who is the applicant before the Tribunal, had applied for selection to the post of Food Safety Officer pursuant a notification dated 31.12.2019 issued by the Kerala Public Service Commission. An OMR test was scheduled to be held on 20.5.2020. Those candidates, who were to participate in the OMR test ought to have submitted a confirmation that they will be participating in the test on or before 11.3.2020. The portal was open for the same from 21.2.2020 till 11.3.2020. The petitioner did not respond to the same and did not get confirmation. However, the examination which was scheduled to be held on 20.5.2020 had been postponed and is re-scheduled on 29.9.2020. The petitioner, therefore, approached the Tribunal inter alia contending that she could not submit her request for confirmation on account of COVID Pandemic and therefore, she should be permitted to participate in the examination. The Tribunal, after considering the specific contentions, observed that as per the procedure prescribed in the notification, submission of confirmation is a mandatory requirement. The date of examination will be notified only later. That apart, during the time when the petitioner had to submit the confirmation, there was no real threat on account of Pandemic and even otherwise if such a concession is extended, it would amount to an illegal exercise of power and therefore, Tribunal dismissed the petition.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner, however, would submit that the petitioner did not submit the confirmation on account of restriction imposed by the PSC that if the candidate does not participate in the examination, that profile will be blocked and she will not be in a position to participate in any other selection process. But when a specific procedure had been prescribed by KPSC to conduct several examinations involving several lakhs of persons, necessarily a procedure will have to be insisted and the candidate who apply for the same has to strictly follow such procedure. If the concession is extended to one person, it may have to be extended to all candidates. In such circumstance, when there is no challenge to the aforesaid provision, we do not think that the Tribunal had committed any error in dismissing the application. No grounds are made out for interference.