JUDGMENT

The above Writ Petition is filed with the following prayers:

i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction quashing Ext.P7 selection list published on 8.2.2014 and to issue a direction to prepare a fresh list of selection on the basis of the seniority.

ii) Issue a declaration that a worker who suffered physical disability while the candidate is working as a casual employee is entitled for a preference in regularization of the casual employee.

iii) Issue a declaration that seniority should be given a preference while regularizing the casual employee in the service of a government owned company.

iv) Issue any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case.

[SIC]

2. This Writ Petition is filed to quash Ext.P7 selection list published on 08.02.2014 and to issue direction to prepare a fresh list of selection on the basis of seniority. The 1^st respondent filed a counter. It will be better to extract the relevant portion of the counter:

‘The averments in Paragraph 2 are untrue and hence denied. It is respectfully submitted that applications were invited for the post of Badali Worker from the general public to ensure utmost transparency in the selection process, and in furtherance of the same, the Petitioner also applied to the said post. It is pertinent to note that the Employment Exchange gave the names of just 2 candidates and issued non- availability certificate with regards to rest of the vacancies. In such a scenario, the 1^st respondent preferred to advertise the vacancies with the same norms as those stated in the Employment Exchange Proforma. As a result of the same, 151 applications were received, and those shortlisted were called for the test and interview. On the basis of the said interview and subsequent skill test, 48 Workers were selected to the post of Badali. True Copy of the select list dated 08.02.2014 is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R1. However, the petitioner does not find place in the said select list. It is respectfully submitted that Exhibit P7 is not a true copy of the Rank list, and moreover that the post of Badali Worker is not of permanent nature.

7. The averments raised by the Petitioner in Grounds I to IV are illogical, untenable and without merits. Once the candidate takes a chance of selection and appears in the interview, and is subsequently declared unsuccessful, then such a candidate cannot challenge the process of selection on any ground. The averments in ground Il regarding past selection proceedings are absolutely false and the Petitioner is put to strict proof.’

3. From the above, it is clear that, after participating in the selection process, the petitioner is challenging the selection list. I think there is no ground to interfere with the selection process. Moreover, this Writ Petition is pending before this Court from 2014 onwards. No interim order is passed in this case. In the said circumstance, this Writ Petition need not be retained.

Therefore, this Writ Petition is closed.

Sd/-

P. V. KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE Sbna/

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4815/2014 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT-P1-TRUE COPY OF THE E.S.I CARD SHOWING THE DATE OF ENTRY OF THE PETITIONER ENTERED IN SERVICE DATED

22/04/2009 EXHIBIT-P2-TRUE COPY OF THE INJURY REPORT ISSUED BY THE INSURANCE MEDICAL OFFICER DATED 26/08/2012.

EXHIBT-P3-TRUE COPY OF THE ENTITLEMENT CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE BRANCH MANAGER OF THE ESI CORPORATION DATED

15/11/2012.

EXHIBIT-P4-TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DATED 07/08/2013.

EXHIBIT-P5-TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION ISSUED BY THE IST RESOPNDENT DATED 16/02/2013.

EXHIBIT-P6-TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT DATED 16/01/2014.

EXHIBIT-P7-TRUE COPY OF THE LIST PUBLISHED ON THE NOTICE BOARD OF THE IST RESPONDENT DATED 08/02/2014.