SC Directs Appointment Of Candidate Turned Away By Kerala Public Service Commission [Read Judgment]

The Supreme Court, recently, directed the Kerala Public Service Commission (KPSC) to appoint a candidate who had been denied advice memo for appointment as a Lower Division Typist.

The Court was hearing an Appeal filed by one Ms. R. Beena, challenging the decision of the KPSC to deny her an advice for appointment claiming that she did not possess the additional qualification prior to the date of notification. This was despite the fact that the Appellant had secured 7^th rank after undertaking a 4-tier scrutiny of her documents during the course of the examination and interview.

The Commission had denied her appointment on the ground that she did not possess the additional qualification of Certificate in Word Processing. This, she had contended, was done in ignorance of the phraseology of the qualification stipulations, which required that the candidates who passed Kerala Government Technical Examination (KGTE) for Typewriting before 2002 “should produce” a certificate in word processing.

“While all “Notes” provided for relaxation in relation to the qualification requirements, Note-1 alone was wrongly construed to attribute a meaning which refused the petitioner her rightful job, by demanding that the Petitioner should produce a pre-dated certificate, due to her passing KGTE exam or its equivalent before 2002,” Ms. Beena had therefore submitted.

The Bench comprising Justice Kurian Joseph and Justice R. Banumathi agreed with this contention and observed, “In that view of the matter, in the peculiar facts of this case, we find it difficult to appreciate the contention, though vehemently advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the Public Service Commission that the Notification required the applicant to possess the Computer Word Processing as well. That possessing read with the expression 'produce' in the background of those candidates who qualified prior to 2002, makes the whole difference. In that view of the matter, the appeals are allowed.”

The Court opined that since the word ‘produce’ is used, “it can only be at the time of either verification of the records or at the time of written examination or at the time of appointment”. It then directed the KPSC to make the appointment within three months, and held that in the event of any delay, the Appellant shall be deemed to be in actual service from November, 2017.