RANGASWAMY Vs. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a Sub Inspector in the Armed Reserve in the Kerala Police Service. The first respondent, the Kerala Public Service Commission, called for applications for appointment to the post of Sub Inspectors in the General Executive branch. Since the said post carried brighter prospects, the petitioner applied for the same. The application was to be sent in a form costing Rs.5/-. The petitioner sent the application in the prescribed form along with a copy in another form bearing 50 paise stamp through the 2nd respondent Inspector General of Police, Trivandrum, on 2-10-1979. The petitioner felt that since he was a service candidate his application had to be routed through the head of the department. Ext. P1 is a true copy of the covering letter sent along with the application. On 16-1-1980 the petitioner received Ext. P2 from the 1st respondent intimating him that his application was rejected as the same had been sent in the wrong form. What happened was that the 2nd respondent instead of forwarding the application bearing Rs. 5/- stamp to the Public Service Commission forwarded the application bearing 50 paise stamp. The petitioner wrote Ext. P3 letter to the first respondent detailing the circumstances under which the mistake took place. Nothing happened. Hence he has approached this Court for a direction to quash Ext. P2 and for a writ of mandamus to direct the Public Service Commission to permit him to compete in the test and for other consequential reliefs.

(2.) Along with the Original Petition, the petitioner filed C.M.P. No. 1245 of 1980 for an interim direction, to direct the first respondent to issue a hall ticket to him and to permit him to take the test on 2-2-1980. This Court gave that direction purely as an interim measure by order dated 28-1-1980, observing that the result of the test would be subject to the result of the O. P.

(3.) This O P. came before Narendran J., who felt that the matter had to be referred to a Division Bench when the decision reported in Uma Shanker v. Union of India ( AIR 1980 SC 1457 ) cited by the petitioner's counsel and the decisions in Kerala Public Service Commission v. Varghese (ILR 1977 (1) Kerala 523) and in Kerala Public Service Commission v. Prasad Chandran (Writ Appeal No. 371 of 1976) cited by the counsel for the first respondent, were brought to his notice. This is how the petition comes up before us.