(1.) These original petitions are filed by the Public Service Commission invoking Article 227 of the Constitution of India. It challenges different verdicts of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal interfering with the PSC's decisions refusing to re-schedule the physical efficiency test of the woman candidates who were passing through different milestones of pregnancy or maternity when they were called for such test for the purpose of recruitment to the post of Excise Guards or Women Police Constables.
(2.) The learned standing counsel for the PSC, also making reference to Rangaswamy v. PSC,1982 KerLT 574 and J. & K.Public Service Commission v. Narinder Mohan, 1994 AIR(SC) 1808 argued that the process of finalisation of the select list is not an act or event which occurs in a single day, that is to say, on the date of publication of the select list. He says that the process of finalisation of the select list, going by the procedure prescribed, would necessarily take reasonable time from the finalisation of initial select list till the approval of that draft by the competent finalising authority after it being vetted at different stages to make it error-free. He, therefore, argues that if the date of finalisation of the select list is treated as the date until which a request for a second opportunity for physical efficiency test could be ordered, that would put the entire select list to jeopardy and stalemate.
(3.) Per contra, learned counsel for the applicants before the Tribunal (candidates) argued that whatever be the legal issues, the fact of the matter remains that on ground realities, the women, who had applied for the different posts and are involved in these litigations, have the eligibility for a second opportunity as directed by the Tribunal, having regard to the proximity of the date of the physical efficiency test as fixed by the PSC and the relevant maternal milestones, particularly the date of delivery of the child or the expected date for such delivery.