Rajesh P.R. v. Kerala State Electricity Board Vyduyuthi Bhavan, Thiruvananthapuram; Kerala Public Service Commission; District Officer, Kerala Public Service Commission

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2013/30TH ASWINA, 1935 WP(C).No. 21967 of 2013 (U) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): - ------------------ RAJESH P.R PALLIKKAVUVELI, KANICHUKULANGARA, KANICHUKULANGARA P.O ALAPPUZHA- 688 544. BY ADVS.SMT.K.N.RAJANI SRI.NAVEEN.T RESPONDENT(S): - ------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY- 695 004. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM) K.S.E.BOARD , VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 004. 3. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 004. 4. THE DISTRICT OFFICER KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, DISTRICT OFFICE ALAPPUZHA 688 001. R3,R4 BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, KPSC R1,2 BY SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-10-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 21967 of 2013 (U) ---------------------------- ## APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS: ------------------------------ EXHIBIT P1: COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 31/3/2011 ISSUED BY THE PSC FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE POST OF MAZDOOR (ELECTRICITY WORKER). - EXHIBIT P2: COPY OF THE APPLICATION UPLOADED BY THE PETITIONER PURSUANT TO EXT.P1 NOTIFICATION. - EXHIBIT P3: COPY OF THE ADMISSION TICKET ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE PSC FOR OMR TEST. - EXHIBIT P4: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 11/6/2013 ISSUED BY THE PSC TO THE PETITIONER. - EXHIBIT P5: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 7/8/2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE JOINT SECRETARY, KPSC. - EXHIBIT P6: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 24/8/2013 ISSUED BY THE MEDICAL OFFICER, PHC, KARAKULAM. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: ------------------------------- EXT.R3(A):TRUE COPY OF THE SHEET RECORDING THE PHYSICAL MEASUREMENT. //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE ## **C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. ========================== W.P.(C). No.21967 OF 2013 ==========================** Dated this the 22[nd] day of October, 2013 ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner was an applicant for appointment to the post of Mazdoor (Electricity Worker) in the Kerala State Electricity Board pursuant to Ext.P1 notification. He came out successful in the OMR test and thereafter, subjected to physical measurement. It was found that he was lacking the minimum prescribed height viz., 157.48 cm. Admittedly, the minimum prescribed hight specified in Ext.P1 notification is 157.48 cm. The contention of the petitioner is that Ext.P6 medical certificate would reveal that he is having a height of 158 cm and therefore, he submitted Ext.P5 representation before the Kerala Public Service Commission carrying the request to re-measure his hight. It is the inaction on the part of the respondents on Ext.P5 and proceeding with the selection process initiated as per Ext.P1 that **W.P.(C).21967/13** 2 constrained the petitioner to approach this Court by filing the captioned writ petition mainly with the following prayers:- - i. issue a writ of mandamus or any other - appropriate writ, direction or order directing respondents 3 and 4 to include the petitioner in the ranked list to be published for appointment to the post of Mazdoor in K.S.E.Board in Alappuzha District. - ii.Issue a writ of mandamus or any other - appropriate writ, direction or order declaring that the petitioner is entitled to be included in the ranked list to be published for appointment to the post of Mazdoor in K.S.E.Board in Alappuzha District. - iii.Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order declaring that the petitioner is having the required height as stipulated in Ext.P1 notification for appointment to the post of Mazdoor in K.S.E.Board in Alappuzha District. - iv.issue a writ of mandamus or any other - appropriate writ, direction or order directing 3 and 4 to conduct a re- - respondents measurement of the height of the petitioner by deputing another Examiner under the supervision of a higher official in the P.S.C. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and also the **W.P.(C).21967/13** 3 learned standing counsel appearing for respondents 3 and 4. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 3 and 4. Along with the counter affidavit, Ext.R3(a) physical measurement sheet has been produced. It is stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioner was subjected to physical measurement by a duly constituted Board and in the original measurement his height was recorded as 155 cm. Aggrieved and dissatisfied with the measurement, the petitioner requested for remeasurement and thereupon, he was subjected to re-measurement in the presence of a senior member of the Commission and an expert from the Physical Education Department. It was found that he was having a height of 155.5 cm. Thus, the two measurements would establish that the petitioner is having height less than the minimum prescribed height of 157.48 cm. In fact, they would go to show that he is having height less than 156 cm. The petitioner relies on Ext.P6 medical certificate to contend that he is having a height of 158 cm. **W.P.(C).21967/13** 4 The certification is to the effect that he was medically examined and found no disease or infirmity which would render him unsuitable for any government service. True that in Ext.P6 his height was recorded as 158 cm. But, such certificate issued by a medical officer cannot be said to have any impact on a selection process. Based on Ext.P6, the petitioner cannot be heard to contend that the measurement and remeasurement effected by the PSC as part of the selection process is liable to be interfered with. Evidently, the selecting the candidates for the post of Electricity Worker is left with the PSC. The physical measurement test was also to be conducted by them. It was originally conducted and thereafter on the request of the petitioner remeasurement was also effected. In this context, it is also to be noted that the selection process initiated as per Ext.P1 has now reached up to the stage of preparation and publication of the ranked list. The prayer of the petitioner is for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 3 and 4 to include him in the ranked list to be published for appointment to the post of Mazdoor in K.S.E.B in **W.P.(C).21967/13** 5 Alappuzha District. As noticed hereinbefore, the ranked list was published pursuant to the selection process initiated as per Ext.P1. A person who has failed in the physical measurement and thus became ineligible to be included in the ranked list cannot be ordered to be included in the ranked list. The learned standing counsel appearing for respondents 3 and 4 relied on a decision of this Court in **Kerala Public Service Commission v. Ashokan** reported in **2003 (2) KLT** **177** to contend that the prayer of the petitioner is untenable. In the said decision the Division Bench held thus:- “When the responsibility of selecting candidates for posts coming under the purview of the Public Service Commission is entrusted with the Public Service Commission and when the Commission has its own machinery and procedure for taking physical measurement of candidates and when the Rules of the Commission provide for redressal of grievances, if any, regarding any mistake or error in the measurement, it is not open to this Court to ignore the measurements made by the Public Service Commission and to an arrange independent measurement by the Security Officer of the Court.” True that, in that case, the learned Judge of this Court directed for **W.P.(C).21967/13** 6 conducting independent measurement by the Security Officer of this Court. That order was taken up in appeal. In the said decision the Division Bench further held:- “We are of the considered view that the functions and responsibilities entrusted with the Public Service Commission should be left to be discharged by the Commission and no other authority including the Court cannot usurp those functions and responsibilities. If there is any patent mistake or error which calls for correction, the Court direct the Public Service may Commission to reconsider the matter.” In this case, evidently, the petitioner on being dissatisfied with the measurements originally taken availed the remedy of appeal and thereupon, he was subjected to re-measurement. Original measurement as also the re-measurement would reveal that the petitioner is having height less than 156 cm whereas the prescribed minimum required height is 157.48 cm. In the said circumstances, this Court will not be justified is issuing any direction to the PSC to include him in the ranked list already published. In view of the decision in **Asokan'** s case (supra), I am of the considered view that **W.P.(C).21967/13** 7 when the responsibility of selecting candidates for appointment to the post of Mazdoor left with the PSC and in discharge of such responsibilities and liabilities cast upon them they conducted measurements and finding a candidate lacking the prescribed minimum height, in the absence of any allegation of mala fides there is no scope for directing for a further measurement after a remeasurement conducted by the PSC solely relying on Ext.P6 certificate. I am of the considered view that Ext.P6 cannot be a reason for interfering with the selection process conducted by the PSC for appointment to the post of Mazdoor based on Ext.P1 notification. For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is liable to fail and accordingly, it is dismissed. **Sd/C.T. RAVIKUMAR (JUDGE)** **spc/** **W.P.(C).21967/13** 8 **C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.** **W.P.(C).21967/13** 9 **JUDGMENT September, 2010**