Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 8270
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR &
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
THURSDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 12TH JYAISHTA, 1944 OP(KAT) NO. 105 OF 2022 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23.3.2022 IN OA(EKM) 1856/2021 OF THE KERALA ADMINISTRTIVE TRIBUNAL,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, (ADDITIONAL BENCH, ERNAKULAM)
PETITIONERS:
1 MUHAMMED AFSAL E.K, AGED 36 YEARS S/O ABDURAHIMAN, IYYAKKATTIL HOUSE, MAYANAD P.O., KOZHIKODE., PIN – 673008
2 BIJITH.P, AGED 31 YEARS S/O. BALAN. P., PUNATHIL HOUSE, EDAKKAD, KOZHIKODE ., PIN – 673005 BY ADV M.R.JAYALATHA RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA REP BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT , INDUSTRIAL TRAINING DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN – 695001
2 THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REP BY ITS SECRETARY, THULASI HILLS, PATTOM PALACE P.O., THIRUVANATHAPURAM., PIN – 695004
3 THE SECRETARY KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION THULASI HILLS, PATTOM PALACE P.O., THIRUVANATHAPURAM, PIN – 695004
4 THE DIRECTOR THE DIRECTORATE OF INDUSTRIAL TRAINING, KERALA STATE INDUSTRIAL TRAINING DEPARTMENT, 4TH AND 5TH FLOOR, LABOUR BHAVAN, VIKAS BHAVAN POST, THIRUVANATHAPURAM , PIN – 695033
5 SANOJ.S, AGED 33 YEARS S/O SIMON.A, RESIDING AT TC 54/1772 ,PLAVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, PAPPANAMCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN – 695018
6 ANTONY I.THOMAS, AGED 27 YEARS S/O IGNATIOUS THOMAS, AGED 27 YEARS, RESIDING AT TC
14/315 ,PALLIKKARA HOUSE, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN – 695033 BY ADVS.
SRI.ADVOCATE GENERAL SHRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, KPSC SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS OP KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar, J.
This OP(KAT) is preferred against an interim order dated
23.02.2022 of the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, Additional Bench, Ernakulam, that refused an interim relief sought by the applicants in the Original Application (O.A). It would appear that the applicants before the Tribunal had preferred the O.A challenging the OMR Exam conducted by the Kerala Public Service Commission (KPSC) alleging that 89 out of the 100 questions in the question paper set by the PSC had been copied from a private publication of the National Instructional Media Institute. The grievance projected by the applicants was essentially that the said setting of questions was contrary to the guidelines given by the PSC to the experts, who were entrusted with the task of setting the question papers, and a violation of the said guidelines by the said experts conferred an arbitrary and unfair advantage to those candidates, who might have consulted the said publication of the National Instructional Media Institute while preparing for the exam.
2. The Administrative Tribunal while considering the O.A at the admission stage also considered the prayer for an interim direction to the PSC to stay all further proceedings in pursuance of the examination conducted on 30.07.2021 for the post of Junior Instructor (Welder) in the Industrial Training Department. Noticing that the selection proceedings had only reached the stage where the short list had been published by the PSC, the Tribunal did not feel the need to pass an interim order staying further proceedings and preferred to post the matter on 26.05.2022 for hearing.
3. Apparently, the applicants in the OA were not satisfied with the interim order of the Tribunal and they carries the matter before this Court through this OP(KAT). The orders dated 08.04.2022, 04.05.2022, 06.05.2022 and 27.05.2022 passed by this Court in this OP(KAT) clearly reveal that this Court was not convinced of the existence of any prima facie case to interfere with the interim order of the Administrative Tribunal, for no positive order was passed by this Court on any of the dates aforementioned. The last order dated 18.05.2022 merely requires the PSC to get instructions as to whether complaints and objections given by the applicants have been examined, and if so the results thereof and also the correctness of the case of the applicants with regard to the 89 questions out of 100, which they say had been taken from private publications.
Under the above circumstances, and finding that, the applicants would in fact be prejudiced by a non-consideration of the O.A itself finally when their contentions on merits can be agitated before Administrative Tribunal, we feel it apposite to dismiss this OP(KAT) preferred against an interim order of the Administrative Tribunal, so that the Administrative Tribunal can consider the O.A.No.1856 of 2021, pending before it, expeditiously, and pass final orders therein. We make it clear that it will be open to the applicants to canvas all the contentions available with them, including the contentions urged in this OP(KAT), before the Administrative Tribunal at the time of hearing of the O.A pending before the said Tribunal.
The OP(KAT) is disposed as above.
Sd/-
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE Sd/-
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
JUDGE mns APPENDIX OF OP(KAT) 105/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit-P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION IN O.A.NO1856/2021 ALONG WITH ANNEXURES DATED
24.11.2021 Exhibit-P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY FILED BY THE 2ND & 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 8.2.2022 Exhibit-P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE IMPLEADING PETITION FILED BY THE ADDITIONAL 5TH & 6TH RESPONDENTS DATED
15.12.2021 Exhibit-P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY FILED BY THE ADDITIONAL
5TH & 6TH RESPONDENTS DATED 17.3.2022 Exhibit-P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE REJOINDER FILED BY THE PETITIONERS DATED 21.3.2022 Exhibit-P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION VIDE M.A(EKM)NO.594/2022 ALONG WITH ANNEXURE A17 DATED
21.3.2022 Exhibit-P7 A TRUE COPY OF
