Anjitha C.P vs Kerala Public Service Commission
2022 Latest Caselaw 10935 Ker

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
        Thursday, the 3rd day of November 2022 / 12th Karthika, 1944
                         WP(C) NO. 22864 OF 2016(G)
PETITIONER:

     ANJITHA C.P.AGED 21,D/O D PRABHAKARAN,T.C.5/2282(1),KAUDIAR
     P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003.

RESPONDENTS:

  1. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION PATTOM P.O.,
     THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY

AND OTHERS.


     Writ petition (civil) praying inter alia that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed along with the WP(C) the High Court be
pleased to direct the 1st to 3rd respondents to include name of petitioner
provisionally in the chance list for interview bearing registration number
S 101005 in category No.042/2016 towards the post of university assistant
and further direct the verification of her certificates in this regard.

     This petition again coming on for orders upon perusing the petition
and the affidavit filed in support of WP(C) and this Courts order dated
17.10.2022 and upon hearing the arguments of M/S SRI.S.NIKHIL SANKAR
Advocates for the petitioners, SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, Standing Counsel for R1
to R3 and ASG OF INDIA for R4, the court passed the following:
                    DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.
                   ----------------------
                   W.P(C)No.22864 of 2016
                 ---------------------------
      Dated this the 3rd day of November, 2022

                            O R D E R

Read orders dated 11.10.2022 and 17.10.2022.

2. Sri.Nikhil Sankar - learned counsel for

the petitioner submitted that he and his client

have gone through the report of Sri.K.Ashokan -

Under Secretary of Kerala Public Service

Commission ('PSC', for short); and that same

cannot be accepted, since it is settled by an

officer of the PSC itself.

3. As is evident from the order of this Court

dated 11.10.2022, I had only ordered the PSC to

suggest a suitable person to interact with the

scribe client and to assess her competence.

However, the PSC appears to have understood this

to mean that such an interaction should be done

and a report filed; consequent to which the

aforementioned Sri.K.Ashokan is stated to have

done so.

4. However, a question of bias is certainly W.P(C)No.22864 of 2016

possible, because Sri.K.Ashokan is an Under

Secretary of the PSC, said entity being a party to

this litigation.

5. I am, therefore, of the firm view that

scribe must be assessed by an independent

Authority.

I, consequently, adjourn this matter to be

called on 9.11.2022; within which time, both sides

will make suggestions as to the Authority who can

interact with his client, so as to assist this

Court in making a final judgment.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE

ACR

03-11-2022 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar