JANI A Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved with the fact that the petitioner has not been selected to the post of District Judge, on reservation, as per the notification issued at Ext.P4.

(2.) Admittedly, the petitioner acquired the 8th rank in the examination while the person who was appointed to the reserved category of 'OBC Muslim' was the 4th respondent, who had the 34th rank. One other Muslim candidate figuring in the rank list between 1 and 34 was the 2nd rank holder who was appointed against the 'No Candidate Available' (NCA) vacancy notified as per Ext.P3.

(3.) The 3rd respondent brought out four notifications simultaneously, wherein N.C.A. vacancies were notified by Exts.P1, P2 and P3. Ext.P3 was with respect to the four anticipated vacancies. The 4th respondent applied under both Exts.P3 and P4, by Ext.R4(a) application. The petitioner applied only under Ext.P4 but was not considered for reservation, applicable even in Ext.P4, despite his higher rank. The 4th respondent was considered under Ext.P4 notification in the first vacancy, since, as per the roster, the same had to be conceded to 'OBC Muslim'. The petitioner contends that he ought to have been considered for reservation.