JUDGMENT

Mohammed Nias.C.P.J.

This O.P (KAT) is filed by the applicants challenging the dismissal of the Original Application filed by them, seeking extension of a ranked list for the post of Lower Division Typist and Clerk Typist/Typist Clerk, brought into force with effect from 31-08-2016 and valid up to 30-08-2019.

2. The petitioners contended before the Tribunal that the respondents had extended the validity of the previous ranked list for the same post of the year 2013 up to 2017 and thus two ranked lists were allowed to operate simultaneously. It is the further contention that the respondents did not extend the period of the ranked list in which the petitioners figure and that has caused prejudice to them. The Tribunal, by the order impugned, found that the issue raised by the petitioners stood covered by the judgment of this Court in Subeena v. Public Service Commission [2019 (3) KHC 735] which held that no extension could be granted to an already expired ranked list by invoking the 5th proviso to Rule 13 of the PSC Rules of Procedure, as it would amount to extension of an expired list. Thus holding that the petitioners cannot be granted any relief, dismissed the Original Application.

3. Before us, the learned counsel for the petitioners Sri. Liju V. Stephen reiterates the contention taken before the Tribunal and submits that the act of the respondents simultaneously operating two ranked lists is illegal and has caused prejudice to the petitioners. It is also his submission that in the facts of the case, the validity of the ranked list in which the petitioners figure ought to have been extended.

4. We heard the learned counsel for the Public Service Commission as well as the learned Government Pleader.

5. On hearing the learned counsel on either side, we do not think that the Tribunal has committed any error in dismissing the Original Application. There is no material produced by the petitioners to suggest that two lists were operated simultaneously or that appointments were made only from the first list and that no appointments were made from the 2nd list. In the absence of any material to prove the same, the said contention cannot be accepted. It is also to be noted that the ranked list in question expired on 30- 08-2019 and the Original Application was filed after a lapse of three years . We do not think that the petitioners are entitled to any relief and the Tribunal has rightly rejected the Original Application. OP (KAT) fails and therefore, it is dismissed. SD/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE SD/- MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., JUDGE ani/

/TRUE COPY/

APPENDIX OF OP(KAT) 311/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE GAZETTE NOTIFICATION DATED 10-9-2014 CATEGORY NO. 388/2014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE GAZETTE NOTIFICATION DATED 28-03-2015 CATEGORY NO: 45/2015 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE RANK LIST NO. 527/ 16/DOP (CAT. NO. 388/2014 LOWER DIVISION TYPIST-PALAKKAD)

IN WHICH THE 1ST PETITIONER IS INCLUDED Annexure A4 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE RANK LIST NO. 554/16/DOP (CAT. NO. 045/2015 CLERK TYPIST- PALAKKAD) IN WHICH THE 1ST PETITIONER IS INCLUDED Annexure A5 :- TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE RANK LIST NO. 529/16/DOD (CAT. NO. 388/2014 LD TYPIST-KOZHIKODE) IN WHICH THE 2ND PETITIONER IS INCLUDED Annexure A6 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE RANK LIST NO. 526/16/DOR (CAT. NO.388/2014 LOWER DIVISION TYPIST- THRISSUR) IN WHICH THE 3RD PETITIONER IS INCLUDED Annexure A7 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE RANK LIST NO. 553/16/DOR (CAT. NO. 045/2015 CLERK TYPIST-THRISSUR) IN WHICH THE 3RD PETITIONER IS INCLUDED Annexure A8 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE RANK LIST NO. 528/16/DOM (CAT. NO. 388/2014 LOWER DIVISION TYPIST- MALAPPURAM) IN WHICH THE 4TH PETITIONER IS INCLUDED Annexure A9 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE RANK LIST NO. 555/16/DOM (CAT. NO.

045/2015 CLERK TYPIST- MALAPPURAM) IN WHICH THE 4TH PETITI