The petitioner states that he applied for Diploma in Elementary Education Course (D.El.Ed.) at Kannur District, for the academic year 2022-24. According to him, based on Exhibit P1 application submitted by the petitioner for admission for the Course of D.El.Ed at Unity TTI, Mattannur, an interview was held to select the eligible candidates. Pursuant to the same, Exhibit P2 interview memo was issued by the 1st respondent on 19.11.2022. The proposed date of the interview was 28.11.2022. Due to reasons which cannot be attributed to the petitioner, the interview card was received by the petitioner only on 30.11.2022, much after the proposed date of the interview. The petitioner states that in view of the above turn of events, the petitioner submitted Exhibit P4 application before the 2nd respondent. However, the petitioner was informed that his request cannot be considered. In the said circumstances petitioner is stated to have submitted Exhibit P5 representation before the 1st respondent, which was also not responded to. According to the petitioner, he has received reliable information that there are vacancies to the seats in different institutions within the jurisdiction of the 1st respondent. It is in the said circumstances the petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:

i) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to consider Exhibit P4, Exhibit P5 and Exhibit P6 and provide the petitioner with a chance to attend the interview.

ii) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 1 respondent to permit the petitioner to participate in the interview yet to be conducted for filling up the vacancies to the course for the years 2022- 2024.

2. In view of the urgency projected by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader was directed to get instructions.

3. It is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that the ranked list is prepared by the Kerala Public Service Commission (KPSC) based on various criteria. Admission was granted to qualified candidates based on the marks obtained during the interview and on the basis of their inclusion in the ranked list. As the petitioner failed to appear for the interview, the next person on the ranked list was granted admission. The next interview is scheduled to be held on 30.12.2022, for which advice cards have been issued to the candidates. In so far as the petitioner is concerned, the petitioner has already secured admission in the Management quota in the Unity TTI, Mattannur. The learned Government Pleader further submitted that the KPSC has already rejected the request of two other candidates who had raised similar contentions.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that no laches can be attributed to the petitioner as it is due to the negligence of the Postal Authorities that the interview card was not received in time. According to the learned counsel, if vacant seats are available after the interview is held on 30.12.2022, directions be issued to the respondents to admit the petitioner herein.

5. In response, the learned Government Pleader submits that the ranked list has been issued by the KPSC, and unless the KPSC revises the ranked list, the respondents will not be justified in calling the petitioner whose name does not find a place in the ranked list. It is also submitted that if admission is granted to the petitioner, it will unsettle the admission granted to other candidates.

6. I have considered the submissions advanced

7. I find that the Ranked List has been prepared by the KPSC based on various criteria. The name of the petitioner does not find a place in the ranked list. Candidates are invited based on their Rank in the list, and admissions have already been granted. As they are not before this Court, it would not be proper for this Court to unsettle the same. Fur