SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 77053

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
M/S.CHANDRA VASUNDHARA GRANITE QUARRY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) 31102/2018



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE &

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 6TH ASHADHA, 1946 OP(KAT) NO. 292 OF 2017 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 02.06.2017 IN OA NO.1054 OF 2016 OF KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PETITIONER/S:

THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 004 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KERALA.

BY ADV SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, KPSC RESPONDENT/S: 1 RAHUL.R AGED 25 YEARS S/O. RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, AGED 25 YEARS, RAJESH BHAVAN, MAYITHARA MARKET P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA, KERALA -

688 524.

2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA -

685 001. BY ADVS.

SMT.CHITRA VIJAYAN GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.JINSON OUSEPH SRI.V.PRINCE DEV SRI.C.RAJESWARA KUMAR SRI.SHABU SREEDHARAN SRI.S.VIJAYAN THIS OP KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.06.2024, ALONG WITH OP(KAT).314/2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE &

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.MANU THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 6TH ASHADHA, 1946 OP(KAT) NO. 314 OF 2017 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN OA NO.620 OF 2016 OF KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PETITIONER/S:

1 KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THULASI HILLS, PATTOM PALACE P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004, KERALA.

2 THE DISTRICT OFFICER REGIONAL OFFICER, KPSC, KOLLAM, CORPORATION BUILDING, ANDAMUKKAM, KOLLAM, KERALA -691001. BY ADV SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, KPSC RESPONDENT/S:

1 SUBAIR.A S/O ASSANARKUNJU, AGED 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT ASM MANZIL, KANNALLOOR PO, KOLLAM, KERALA-691576.

2 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO MOTOR VECHICLES DEPARTMENT, MOTOR VEHICLES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, STATUE J., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA-

695001.

3 THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER O/O. TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, MOTOR VEHICLES DEPARTMENT, TRANS TOWERS, VAZHUTHACAUD PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA- 695014.

BY ADVS.

SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS OP KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.06.2024, ALONG WITH OP(KAT).292/2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 27th day of June 2024 A.Muhamed Mustaque, J.

These original petitions were filed by the Public Service Commission in the year 2017, aggrieved by the directions issued by the Tribunal ordering re-measurement of the applicant therein for the purpose of selection to the post of Police Constable.

2. On 09.08.2017, this Court granted interim order and the same was in force more than 7 years. The rank list was also expired. We also note the judgment of this Court in KPSC v. Ashoka [2003 (2) KLT 177], wherein this Court held as follows:

“Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case, we are of the view that the procedure adopted by the learned single Judge in directing the Security Officer of the High Court to measure the height of the candidate and granting relief on the basis of such measurement is not correct or proper. When the responsibility of selecting candidates for posts coming under the purview of the Public Service Commission is entrusted with the Public Service Commission and when the Commission has its own machinery and procedure for taking physical measurement of candidates and when the Rules of the Commission provide for redressal of grievances, if any, regarding any mistake or error in the measurement, it is not open to this Court to ignore the measurements made by the Public Service Commission and to arrange an independent measurement by the Security Officer of the Court. Even if the Court is satisfied that there is defect or error in the measurement made by the Commission, the Court can only direct the Public Service Commission to reconsider the matter. It is not for the Court

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top