LAWS(KER)-2008-10-4

SAJEEV P Vs. K P S C

Decided On October 07, 2008
SAJEEV P Appellant
V/S
K P S C Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner and the 3rd respondent are aspirants for the post of Shift Analyst in the Kerala Minerals and Metals Ltd. , the 2nd respondent herein, for selection to which post, the 1st respondent - Public Service Commission invited applications by notification dated 24/05/1994 pursuant to which both of them applied. A written test was conducted and a short list dated 27/02/1998 was published, in which both found a place, but the 3rd respondent only provisionally on account of want of submission of attested copies of certificates of qualification along with the application, which was a notified requirement for a valid application, at the relevant time. In the interview which followed on 02/05/1998 and 04/05/1998, the petitioner participated, but the 3rd respondent was not invited, since the defect in the application was not cured, although allegedly a defect curing memo was issued by the Public Service Commission to the 3rd respondent on 23/12/1997. A rank list was published on 10/06/1998 in which the petitioner was rank no. 1. Pursuant thereto, he was advised for the post also, as per Ext. P1 advice memo. As instructed in the advise memo itself, he wrote to the Public Service Commission since he did not get appointment within three months.

(2.) THEN came Ext. P2 show cause notice dated 30/10/1998, directing the petitioner to show cause why the advice allegedly made by mistake should not be cancelled invoking R. 3 (c) of Part II of the Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules on the ground that on rectification of the rank list, the 3rd respondent had to be included as rank no. 1, the petitioners rank number was reassigned as no. 1a, and as there are only two vacancies, the petitioner being the juniormost among those advised, his advice had to be cancelled. The petitioner filed Ext. P3 reply stating inter alia that the reasons for lowering of his rank was not clear from the show case notice.

(3.) I have heard counsel on both sides at length and considered the arguments in detail.