JUDGMENT

Manjula Chellur, Ag. C. J.

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant so also the learned standing counsel for the Commission. It is not in dispute that the appellant herein was also one of the applicant for the post of Attendant (Sidha), i.e., two reported vacancies in district wise at Idukki. It is not in dispute that the criterion for the appointment was a pass in Standard VII (new) or its equivalent and three years experience in handling Sidha Medicine. It is not in dispute that in pursuance of Ext.P1 notification, the certificate of experience has to be in the format indicated in the Annexure.

2. Apparently, the appellant was also called for the interview and it is not in dispute, she was not selected for the said post. The appellant approached the single Judge with a prayer to declare that the permission granted by the Commission to the first three candidates in the rank list to appear for the interview is not sustainable since they have not followed the prescribed conditions stipulated in the notification and also to issue a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to delete their name from the rank list as they were not eligible to attend the interview. It i