Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Muhammed Shiyas P.V vs High Court Of Kerala on 21 March, 2013

Author: C.T. Ravikumar

Bench: C.T.Ravikumar

       

  

  

 
 
                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                     PRESENT:

                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR

            FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JUNE 2013/31ST JYAISHTA 1935

                            WP(C).No. 15772 of 2013 (R)
                             ----------------------------

PETITIONER(S):
------------------

         MUHAMMED SHIYAS P.V, aged 26 YEARS
         S/O.BASHEER AHMED, LAILA MANZIL, ICE ROAD
         VATAKARA- 673 103.

           BY ADVS.SRI.A.JAYASANKAR
                      SRI.MANU GOVIND
                      SRI.JOPHY POTHEN KANDANKARY
                      SRI.K.REEHA KHADER

RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------

      1. HIGH COURT OF KERALA
         REPRESENTED BY THE REGISTRAR (GENERAL)
         ERNAKULAM- 682 031

      2. THE REGISTRAR
         RECRUITMENT AND COMPUTERISATION
         HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM- 682 031
         REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER
         KOTTAYAM- 686 001.


         BY KRB KAIMAL, STANDING COUNSEL
         BY SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL, STANDING COUNSEL


THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-06-2013,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 15772 of 2013 (R)
----------------------------

                                    APPENDIX

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:
------------------------------

EXHIBIT     P1.COPY     OF    NCA   NOTIFICATION  REC4-NO.5383/2013 DATED
              21.03.2013 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTS.

EXHIBIT P2. COPY OF NOTIFICATION NO. REC4-5384/2013 DATED 21.03.2013
              ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTS.

EXHIBIT P3. COPY OF APPLICATION FORMAT PURSUANT TO EXHIBIT P1 NCA
              NOTIFICATION.

EXHIBIT P4. COPY OF APPLICATION FORMAT PURSUANT TO EXHIBIT P2 GENERAL
              NOTIFICATION.

EXHIBIT P5. COPY OF THE REJECTION MEMO DATED 04.06.2013 REJECTING
              APPLICATION       NO.5309  PURSUANT    TO  EXHIBIT  P1 NCA
              NOTIFICATION.

EXHIBIT P6.COPY OF THE REJECTION MEMO DATED 04.06.2013 REJECTING
              APPLICATION NO.2793 PURSUANT TO EXHIBIT P2 GENERAL
              NOTIFICATION.

EXHIBIT P7. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 23.04.2013 IN WPC 10585/2013.

EXHIBIT P8. COPY OF ORDER DATED 07.05.2013 IN IA 328/13 IN WA 677/13
              PREFERRED AGAINST EXHIBIT P7.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:NIL
-----------------------------------




                                    //TRUE COPY//


                                          P.A.TO JUDGE



                       C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.
                 ==========================
                     W.P.(C). No.15772 OF 2013
                 ==========================
                  Dated this the 21st day of June, 2013

                            JUDGMENT

The petitioner who is an applicant for appointment to the post of Munsiff-Magistrate in the Kerala Judicial Service is aggrieved by the rejection of his applications submitted pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 notifications. In the said applications, the petitioner had left the columns 24 and 26(b) respectively, blank and the applications were rejected citing the said reasons and he was intimated the factum of rejection as per Exts.P5 and P6. The petitioner raises various contentions to canvass the position that the rejection of applications was uncalled for as the action in leaving the said columns blank could not have been and should not have been treated as fatal enough to entail their rejection. The question whether leaving columns 24/26 blank or filling them inappropriately is a serious defect to entail rejection of an application submitted for appointment to the post of W.P.(C).15772/13 2 Munsiff-Magistrate was considered by this Court in W.P.(C). No.15021 of 2013 and connected cases and it was held in the affirmative, as per common judgment dated 20.6.2013. As per the said judgment, it was also held that the mere action in leaving the said columns blank would not turn fatal enough to result in rejection of application in case the details failed to furnish by the concerned applicant are discernible from the details given elsewhere in the same application. The learned standing counsel submitted that in view of the said judgment and the details given by the petitioner in the respective applications, he can be permitted to participate in the selection process. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to treat the petitioner's application submitted pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 notifications as valid and to permit him to appear for the preliminary examination to be held on 23.6.2013 and subject to its outcome in the further stages of the selection. The respondents shall take all steps to issue hall ticket to the petitioner; but the same need not be sent to the petitioner on account of paucity of W.P.(C).15772/13 3 time. If the petitioner is desirous to appear for the said examination which is to be conducted on 23.6.2013, he shall collect the hall ticket from the respondents and appear for the examination.

Sd/-

                                        C.T. RAVIKUMAR
                                              (JUDGE)

spc/

W.P.(C).15772/13    4




                       C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.




                       JUDGMENT

                       September,2010

W.P.(C).15772/13    5