High Court of KeralaWP(C)/20750/2015dismissed as infructuous

Ajith Sha A.S v. The Kerala Public Service Commission

2015-07-24Honourable Dr. Justice A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JULY 2015/2ND SRAVANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 20750 of 2015 (P) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER:

------------------------------------------------ AJITH SHA A.S, AGED 33 YEARS S/O.SHAHUL HAMEED, 'SHA MANZIL', KARYAMBADI.P.O WAYANAD-673591.

BY ADVS.SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN SRI.P.M.NEELAKANDAN SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN SRI.SABU GEORGE SRI.S.NITHIN (ANCHAL) RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:

----------------------------------------------------

1. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, THULASI HILLS, PATTOM.P.O THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004.

2. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VAIDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, -695004.

R BY SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, KPSC R BY SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 20750 of 2015 (P) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT.P1: DATED 31-12-2011,TRUE COPY OF THE GAZETTE NOTIFICATION. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL.

--------------------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.20750 OF 2015 (P) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of July, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner, who was an applicant for the post of Sub Engineer under the 2nd respondent Board, is aggrieved by the fact that, notwithstanding his appearance in the written test in connection with the selection to the said post, he has not been called for an interview by the 1st respondent Commission.

When the matter was taken up for admission today, it is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has since received an intimation informing him of the rejection of his candidature, and, accordingly, he would have to challenge the said intimation letter if he is aggrieved by the same. Taking note of the said submission of counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge the rejection letter communicated to him by the 1st respondent.

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE prp