## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
## **PRESENT**
## **THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA**
## **FRIDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 19TH MAGHA, 1940**
## **WP(C).No. 14504 of 2018**
## **PETITIONER/S:**
- **1 SANTHOSH P.K AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. (LATE) KUNJIKANNAN NAIR,PUTHIYEDATH HOUSE, PERUVANNAMUZHY P.O., KOZHIKODE.**
- **2 ANILKUMAR M.A. AGED 47 YEARS, S/O. AYYAPPAN (LATE), MOOLAMKUDY HOUSE, PALISSERY,PADUVAPURAM P.O., ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.**
- **3 AJAYAN S.V. AGED 47 YEARS, S/O. VISWANATHAN, SASTHAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, AYYAMPUZHA P.O., KALADY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.**
**BY ADVS. SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN**
## **RESPONDENT/S:**
- **1 THE PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA LTD REGISTERED OFFICE KOTTAYAM, KANJIKUZHI, KOTTAYAM - 686 002, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.**
- **2 KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,PATTOM, PALACE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 004.**
**BY ADVS. SRI.RAJESH N., SC, PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA LTD. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, KPSC**
**THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
**WP(C).No. 14504 of 2018**
**2**
## **JUDGMENT**
**The petitioners, who appeared for the selection for appointment to the post of Drivers in Plantation Corporation, has filed this writ petition seeking a direction to the Public Service Commission to publish an additional rank list for the post of Drivers in tune with the Full Bench decision of this Court in** _**Ravi das v. Public Service Commission**_ **: 2009(2) KLT 295. They also prayed for a direction to the Public Service Commission to produce the details of marks awarded to the petitioners in the interview.**
**2. Petitioners have been working as permanent workers under the Plantation Corporation from various dates and they claimed that they have been performing the duties of Drivers for the last several years. As per Ext.P1 notification issued by the PSC, applications were invited for appointment to the post of Drivers from among suitable and qualified**
**WP(C).No. 14504 of 2018**
**3**
**workers of the Plantation Corporation of Kerala Limited having literacy, current Driving License to drive Heavy Motor Vehicles, normal visual standards and physical fitness. The petitioners applied and appeared for the test and they were included in the short list. However when Ext.P6 rank list was published, which came into force on 10.04.2018, there were only five candidates. Pointing out that the number of vacancies notified in Ext.P1 issued on 15.11.2014 was three and stating that there are several other vacancies existing in the Plantation Corporation, petitioners submitted that the number of candidates included in the list are insufficient and going by the Full Bench judgment, there should be sufficient number of candidates atleast to the tune of thrice the number of vacancies which were reported to the Public Service Commission before the list was published.**
**3. The 2[nd] respondent has filed a counter**
**WP(C).No. 14504 of 2018**
**4**
**affidavit stating that petitioners did not qualify in the proficiency test conducted. It was stated that even though the petitioners were included in the short list, subsequently it was found that out of the 21 candidates called for Practical Test (Driving Test) held on 28.12.2016, certain candidates had not obtained the qualifying marks. It is stated that the Practical Test had two components i.e., H-test and Driving (Road) test. Only those candidates who qualified the H-test were permitted to attend the Road test. It is further stated that as per circular 02/2014, “No candidates shall be eligible to be included in the Short List prepared on the basis of the Practical Test viz; H-test and Driving Test, if he/she has not obtained average + and above for steering steadiness. It is also ordered that candidates who have secured “average + and above” for items 3 to 11 of Driving Skill appraisal form only be included in the Ranked List”. A short list of 8**
**WP(C).No. 14504 of 2018**
**5**
**candidates were published on 01.03.2017 and interview was held on 07.02.2018. It is stated that on further scrutiny of the Score sheet of the Practical Test and interview sheet, it was found that three candidates, who are the petitioners, were not qualified in the Driving test (Road test). They had not obtained 'average + and above' for items 3 to 11 of Driving Skill Appraisal. The mistake was rectified invoking Rule 15A of the Rules of Procedure.**
**4. The 2[nd] respondent thereafter filed an additional counter affidavit producing Exts.R2(a) to R2(c) copies of Driving Skill Appraisal forms in respect of the petitioners from which it can be seen that they did not secure the 'average + above' as provided in the circular.**
**5. Subsequent to the production of**
**Exts.R2(a) to R2(c), the petitioners have sought amendment of the writ petition alleging that the selection was malafide and seeking a declaration**
**WP(C).No. 14504 of 2018**
**6**
**that the practical test of the 2[nd] respondent for the post of Drivers pursuant to Ext.P1 notification is tainted with malafides, manipulation and seeking for a direction to PSC to conduct a fresh practical test.**
**6. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Standing counsel for the Public Service Commission and the learned Standing Counsel for the Plantation Corporation.**
**7. When the writ petition was filed, petitioners did not have a case that there was any malafides in the selection. They did not have any complaint against any of the Officers, who subjected them to the Driving Skill test. Even by way of the amendment sought, they have not alleged any such complaint against any of the members of the selection committee. None of the members of the selection committee members is impleaded or sought to be impleaded in this writ petition. They have not also stated the motive, behind such**
**WP(C).No. 14504 of 2018**
**7**
**manipulation as alleged or for not including them. It is pertinent to note that the writ petition was filed for a direction to expand the rank list. It is only after the PSC produced the appraisal forms along with the additional counter affidavit that they thought of raising such allegation, which can only be an experimental attempt. Even though the petitioners submitted that they have been driving the vehicles, of the Corporation their practice alone will not make them eligible for selection in case at the time of the test, they did not perform in accordance with the standards prescribed by the Public Service Commission.**
**Therefore, I do not find any illegality in the selection or in the rank list. Petitioners do not deserve any relief.**
**Accordingly, this writ petition fails and**
**is dismissed.**
**Sd/-**
**P.V.ASHA, JUDGE.**
ww
**WP(C).No. 14504 of 2018**
**8**
## **APPENDIX**
## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:**
**EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE GAZETTE DATED 15.11.2014 INVITING APPLICATIONS FOR THE POST OF DRIVER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.**
**EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SHORT LIST DATED 1.3.2017 PUBLISHED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DRIVING LICENSE PARTICULARS OF THE 1ST PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE DRIVING LICENSE PARTICULARS OF THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE DRIVING LICENSE PARTICULARS OF THE 3RD PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RANKED LIST WHICH CAME INTO FORCE WITH EFFECT FROM 10.4.2018 IN CATEGORY NO.433/2014. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 13.12.2014 ISSUED BY THE MANAGER PERAMBRA ESTATE OF PLANTATION CORPORATION OF KERALA LTD. EXHIBIT P8 COPY OF THE APPRAISAL FORM IN THE CASE OF THE 1ST PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P8(A) COPY OF THE APPRAISAL FORM IN THE CASE OF 2ND PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P8(B) COPY OF THE APPRAISAL FORM IN THE CASE OF 3RD PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P9 TYPED COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.02/2014 DATED 6.01.2014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT R2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE DRIVING SKILL APPRAISAL FORM OF THE 1ST PETITIONER.**
**WP(C).No. 14504 of 2018**
**9**
**EXHIBIT R2(B) TRUE COPY OF THE DRIVING SKILL APPRAISAL FORM OF THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXHIBIT R2(C) TRUE COPY OF THE DRIVING SKILL APPRAISAL FORM OF THE 3RD PETITIONER.**
