CHOTHI R.S. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in both these writ petitions challenge the appointment of Smt.Akhila V.J, who is the 3rd respondent in both the cases on the ground that she was not qualified as on the last date fixed for receipt of applications. The parties and documents referred to in this common judgment are as described in W.P.(C) No.9771 of 2018, unless specified otherwise.

(2.) The 2nd respondent issued Ext.P1 notification dated 27.05.2014, inviting applications for appointment to various posts including Lower Division Clerk. The last date fixed for receipt of applications was 15.07.2014. The qualifications prescribed for appointment as LD Clerk was (1) B.Com or B.Sc Maths (2) KGTE Typewriting English (Higher) (3) Two years experience in clerical job/office accounts in Govt./Quasi Govt. firms or institutions. In Ext.P4 rank list published after written test and interview, the 3rd respondent and petitioners in W.P.(C) Nos.25910 of 2016 and 9771 of 2018 were ranked at serial no.2, 3 and 4 respectively. The 4th respondent Smt.Arathi who was rank no.3 filed W.P.(C)No.25910 of 2016 alleging that the 3rd respondent did not have the requisite qualification as on the last date for submission of application, as she had not passed the KGTE (Higher) examination and challenging the selection and appointment of the 3rd respondent. During the pendency of that writ petition, the petitioner filed this writ petition, stating that Smt.Arathi-rank no.3 got employment in University and she would not be interested in pursuing the matter and that the petitioner, who is the next candidate is liable to be appointed in the place of the 3 rd respondent.

(3.) In WPC() No.9771 of 2018, the 2nd respondent filed a statement stating that a Committee was constituted by the Government as per G.O(Rt) No.516/2016/H.Edn dated 19.06.2016, for the selection to various posts under the 2nd respondent and the committee interviewed the candidates and prepared the rank list based on the marks in the written test and interview; the 3rd respondent was found to have all the educational qualifications and experience having first class in B.Com, VHSE in Accountancy and Auditing, KGTE English Higher and experience in clerical job as Assistant under the 2nd respondent for two years and four months. It is stated that the 3rd respondent had produced a certificate in which the date of declaration of result was shown as August 2014. However she produced Ext.R2(b) letter dated 24.03.2015 issued by the Secretary, Pareeksha Commissioner Office, Poojappura, Thiruvananthapuram, addressed to her, informing that the correct time of publishing the result of the examination was May 2014. But it is erroneously printed as August 2014. It is further stated that the 2nd respondent thereupon requested the Commissioner to inform the genuinity of the letter dated 24.03.2015 and thereupon the Secretary. Pareeksha Commissioner Office as per Ext.R2(d) letter dated 15.03.2016 confirmed the genuinity of the letter dated 24.03.2015 and reported that the letter Ext.R2(b) was issued from their office. It was therefore stated that candidates were included in the rank list after scrutinizing their qualification, experience, etc and based on merit.