High CourtsSingle Bench(2022) 11 KL CK 0020

Sheeba Palakkol vs Kerala Public Service Commission

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 1 November 2022

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anu Sivaraman, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) No.34536 Of 2022

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 573 words

Anu Sivaraman, J

1.

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs :-

“(i) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1st respondent to issue hall ticket to the petitioner for writing the written examination scheduled on 02.11.2022 for the post of LD Clerk under Kerala Water Authority.

(ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P7 E-mail for issuing Hall ticket to the petitioner for writing the written examination scheduled on 02.11-2022 for the post of LD Clerk under Kerala Water Authority.”

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent.

3.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was an applicant to the post of LD Clerk in the Water Authority on the basis of Ext.P4 notification dated 16.07.2012. It is submitted that the petitioner’s application had been accepted and that the petitioner had been suffering from chronic back pain and was totally bed ridden. It is submitted that the PSC had sent a text message on 22.08.2022 to the petitioner’s registered mobile number requiring confirmation for writing the examination, which is a part of the selection procedure. However, the petitioner had not noticed the text message. It is submitted that on coming to know that the examination is scheduled to be conducted on 02.11.2022, the petitioner had approached the PSC with request for writing the examination along with Ext.P6 medical certificate dated 26.10.2022, but the said representation had not been considered. The learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, requests that the petitioner may be permitted to provisionally attend the examination being conducted on 02.11.2022.

4.

The learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent submits that the condition with regard to online confirmation for writing the examination is a procedure, which is specifically prescribed and notified to the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner had been duly informed by message dated 22.08.2022 that she is required to make the confirmation through OTP system on any date between 23.08.2022 to 11.09.2022. It is submitted that Ext.P6 medical certificate would show that the petitioner was indisposed only from 10.09.2022 to 25.09.2022 and that the confirmation can be done online or through the mobile application and there is absolutely no reason why the petitioner could not have done the confirmation in time. It is submitted that in case the petitioner is permitted to attend the examination at this late date, there would be several persons who are identically situated who could not make the confirmation for various reasons, who would be prejudiced by such order. The learned counsel also relied on a decision of a Division Bench of this Court in O.P. (KAT) No.290 of 2020 dated 18.09.2020 where such permission had been denied by the KAT and was affirmed by the Division Bench of this Court even when the complaint was with regard to the inability to submit the confirmation on account of the Covid pandemic.

Having considered the contentions advanced and in view of the fact that the petitioner does not have a case that the message as evidenced by Ext.P5 was not sent to her registered mobile number, I am of the opinion that the prayers, as sought for, cannot be granted. The writ petition fails and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.