JUDGMENT

This writ petition has been filed on being aggrieved by the rejection of the application submitted by the petitioner for appointment to the post of Munsiff-Magistrate under the Kerala Judicial Service in pursuance of Ext.P2 notification. The application was rejected and the said factum was intimated to the petitioner as per Ext.P7. In Ext.P7, it is stated that the petitioner had not filled up column No.30 properly. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents made available a copy of the application submitted by the petitioner bearing No.512. It is evident from the said application that though the petitioner had to furnish the names and addresses of three respectable persons who could testify about her character, conduct and reputation as against column No.30, she had given the names and addresses of only two such persons.

W.P.(C).15763/13 2

2. I had occasion to consider a similar case in W.P.(C).

No.15620 of 2013. After considering all the relevant aspects in the light of relevant provisions, this Court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to allow the petitioner therein to appear for the examination. Consequential directions were also given. I