Fathimath Sabeera v. Kerala Public Service Commission and others

1 WPC 39489/23 # **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI ``` ``` THURSDAY, THE 1[ST] DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 12TH MAGHA, 1945 WP(C) NO.39489OF 2023 ``` ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` FATHIMATH SABEERA AGED 29 YEARS W/O VINEESH, MANDAYAPURATH HOUSE, CHEMBRA, MEENADATHUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676307 ``` ``` BY ADV P.T.SHEEJISH ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** ``` 1KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695004 2THE SECRETARY , KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695004 3THE SECRETARY, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REGIONAL OFFICE MALAPPURAM, K.P.S.C. DISTRICT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, NEW BLOCK UP HILL, MALAPPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 676505 4THE DISTRICT OFFICER, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, DISTRICT OFFICE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676001 ``` ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` SC SRI. P.C SASIDHARAN ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 2 WPC 39489/23 ## **Judgment** (Dated 1st day of February 2024) The petitioner attended the common test conducted to the post of Accountant/ Junior Accountant /Accounts Assistant/ Accounts Clerk/ Assistant Manager/Assistant GR.II in various Government owned Companies/Corporations/ Boards and also to the post of Accountant Gr.II/Account Clerk/Junior Accountant/Store Assistant Gr.II in various government owned Companies/ Corporations/ Boards. When the list was published, the petitioner was included in the shortlist and was called for certificate verification. During verification, it was noted that name of the petitioner and date on which the photograph was taken, are not clearly visible in the profile photo uploaded in the Kerala Public Service Commission (the Commission) One Time Registration Portal. 3 WPC 39489/23 2. The case of the petitioner is that she had duly followed all the mandatory instructions and uploaded the photograph to her profile, clearly showing her name and date of photograph. The error has happened due to a technical glitch and not due to the mistake on the part of the petitioner. As soon as she found the error in her profile photograph, she uploaded another photograph and corrected the error in the profile, and later, one and the same certificate was also uploaded. Thereafter, it was made known to her that her candidature had been rejected upon further scrutiny as the photograph was invalid. She, therefore, submitted a representation to the 2[nd] respondent and requested to include her name in the main list after complying with the verification process. But when the main list to category No.610/2021 and 611/2021 were published the petitioner’s name was not included in both the lists. She submitted another representation 4 WPC 39489/23 before the 2[nd] respondent on 27.10.2023, but that was also not acted upon. Therefore, she has approached this court by filing this Writ Petition to quash Ext.Nos.P8 and P9 main lists to the extent of not including the petitioner’s name in the main list and also to modify Ext.Nos.P8 and P9 to include her name in the main list. 3. A counter affidavit is filed on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4. The Commission has invited applications for the posts as per category No.610/2021 as well as 611/2021 by Gazette notification dated 15.12.21. The last date for submitting the online application was 19.1.2022. The probability list for the categories came into force with effect from 4.8.2023 and 14.8.2023 respectively. The one time verification for the candidates included in the probability list was conducted on 21.8.2023 and 22.8.2023 and during detailed scrutiny of the applications, it was found that the name of the 5 WPC 39489/23 petitioner was incorrectly and partially entered and the date was not clearly visible in the uploaded application and not conforming to the instructions issued by the Commission. 5. The photograph uploaded by the petitioner on 10.1.2022 was not as per the specification stipulated by the Commission. On 23.6.2023, after the last date of submitting the application, she uploaded a photograph as per the specifications insisted by the Commission. The profile photos uploaded after the submission of the application for a particular post, cannot be taken into consideration against another post. As per instructions in the Gazette Notification, it is specifically stated that the candidates are responsible for the correctness of personal information, and applications submitted not in accordance with the conditions of the Notification will be summarily rejected. Since the profile photo uploaded by the petitioner is not in accordance with the instructions given 6 WPC 39489/23 by the Commission, the petitioner was not included in the main list. 6. Heard the counsel Shri.P.T.Sheejish for the petitioner and the standing counsel, Shri.P.C. Sasidharan for the respondents. 7. A perusal of Ext.P3 Admission Ticket issued would show that the name shown in the application form as well as the one which is printed on the photograph, are different. Moreover the date on which the photograph was taken is also not visible. It is noticing these defects, that the petitioner uploaded another photo clearly showing the name as well as the date on which the photo was taken. Therefore, even according to the petitioner, there was a mistake at the time of the original submission. 8. The question to be considered is whether such a defect can be subsequently cured and be accepted by the Commission 7 WPC 39489/23 to include the petitioner in the rank list. This question has been answered by a full bench of this court in O.P.(KAT) No. 143 of 2016, in which paragraph Nos.29 and 46 reads as follows: “29. Any candidate applying for a job should be careful in submitting their applications in compliance with the instructions. The ability to do so is also a means to assess the sense of responsibility of the candidate who seeks to be appointed in his service. The assessment starts from the application of the candidate. The candidates are expected to have the minimum responsibility to submit the application in tune with the instructions, except in circumstances where technical problems beyond their control create difficulties, despite taking sufficient care and caution. 46. The counsel appearing for the respective parties have advanced identical contentions as in the other cases considered by us hereinabove, in this appeal also. We have already held that the stipulations insisted upon by the PSC prescribing the manner in which the applications are to be submitted by the candidates have to be strictly complied with. Any lapse on the part of the candidate in complying with the conditions shall entail the consequence of rejection if his/her application. Any dilution of the stipulations by this Court treating one or the other condition as having been substantially complied with would only be counter productive. Since the vast majority of candidates succeed in submitting flawless applications on the basis of the instructions of the PSC, 8 WPC 39489/23 indulgence to the few who are unable to do so would not be justified. Such indulgence would create unnecessary hurdles in the process of selection undertaken by the PSC. “ 9. The counsel for the petitioner relied on a judgment of the apex court in **Vashist Narayan Kumar v. The State of Bihar and others (2024 SCC Online SC 2)** and argued that inadvertent error in the application form could be corrected and such a person can be included in the rank list. It was a case in which the appellant’s application was uploaded with the date of birth as 8.12.1997, while the actual date of birth was 18.12.1997. On such peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the apex court held that the error was not so grave as to constitute wrong, misleading information and allowed the appellant to be included in the selection process if he was not otherwise disqualified. 9 WPC 39489/23 10. Coming to the facts of this case, it is evident from the counter that separate spaces are provided for entering the name as well as the date on which the photograph is taken and the candidate is to type the name in the space provided as well as the date in which the photograph is taken. If the petitioner has carefully done this, it would have definitely found a place in the profile picture. Therefore, the mistake in the name and non-filling of the space in the application format for inclusion of the date, is vital. In such circumstances, the judgment mentioned by the apex court in **Vashist Narayan Kumar** (supra) has no application in this case and the judgment of the full bench of this court is directly applicable. In such a situation, this Petition cannot be allowed and therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed. The counsel further submitted that this court may direct the commission not to reject the application of the petitioner 10 WPC 39489/23 after the corrections have been carried out. The standing counsel submitted that any applications filed pursuant to any notification after the corrections have been carried out will only be on the basis of the details available as of the date of submission. This submission is recorded. Sd/- **BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE** dl/ 11 WPC 39489/23 ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 39489/2023`** ``` PETITIONER EXHIBITS ``` ``` Exhibit P1THE TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRAORDINARY GAZETTE NOTIFICATION DATED 15.12.2021 FOR CATEGORY NO. 611/2021 ``` ``` Exhibit P2THE TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRAORDINARY GAZETTE NOTIFICATION DATED 15.12.2021 FOR CATEGORY NO. 610/2021 ``` ``` Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE ADMISSION TICKET ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER ``` ``` Exhibit P4TRUE COPY OF THE PROBABILITY LIST PUBLISHED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 04.08.2023 ``` ``` Exhibit P5COPY OF THE ONE AND SAME CERTIFICATE UPLOADED BY THE PETITIONER ``` - `Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE KPSC ONE TIME REGISTRATION PORTAL` - `Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 21.09.2023 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT` - `Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE MAIN LIST TO CATEGORY NO. 610/2021 WHICH CAME INTO FORCE WITH EFFECT FROM 09.10.2023` ``` Exhibit P9TRUE COPY OF THE MAIN LIST TO CATEGORY NO. 611/2021 WHICH CAME INTO FORCE WITH EFFECT FROM 10.10.2023 ``` - `Exhibit P10 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 27.10.2023 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT`