PRIYA M.S. Vs. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was a candidate included in the rank list published by the Kerala Public Service Commission for appointment to the post of Last Grade Servant in various departments in Ernakulam District. She was rank No.181 in the main list and the third respondent was included as rank No.185. Both belonged to Dheevara community. Her grievance was that before advising her, the third respondent was advised by the PSC on 26.08.2013. Yet another grievance was that the person with Rank No.165 a Dheevara candidate, was advised against a reserved post, though, he was liable to be advised against a general vacancy.

(2.) HIGHLIGHTING these grievances, the applicant approached the Tribunal by filing O.A.(EKM) No.95 of 2013. During the pendency of the O.A., the applicant was advised for appointment on 07.12.2013. Taking notice of these developments, the Tribunal disposed of the O.A by Ext.P2 order clarifying that the claim of the petitioner for retrospective advice is left open and that if she moves the PSC, the PSC will deal with the matter without delay. It is this order, which is challenged before us.

(3.) FROM the facts detailed above, it is obvious that what survives is the claim of the petitioner for retrospective advice with effect from a prior date. It was taking note of this factual situation that, the Tribunal left that issue open and gave liberty to the petitioner to move the PSC. The said view taken by the Tribunal does not deserve any interference.