BEENA R. versus KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION & ORS.

Citation: [2017] 6 S.C.R. 510 · Decided: 28-07-2017 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: KURIAN JOSEPH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
[2017] 6 S.C.R. 510 
BEENA R. 
v. 
KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal Nos. 9843-9844 of 2017) 
B 
JULY 28, 2017 
c 
[KURIAN JOSEPH AND R. BANUMATHI, JJ.) 
Service Law - Appointment - Of lower division typist -
Qualification inclutit:d lower grade certificate in KGTE Typewriting 
and computer word processing - Objection taken against the 
appellant that the qualification 'computer word processing' was 
acquired after the last date of notification - Held: Note I of 
qualification lays down that those who have passed KGTE 
Typewriting before January, 2002, should 'produce' separate 
certificate for computer word processing - Word 'produce' is used 
D 
only at the time of verification of the recordY or at the time of written 
examination or at the time of appointment -Appellant had 'produced' 
the certificate prior to the written examination - Therefore, appellant 
to be appointed in accordance with her position in the rank list. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 9843-
E 
9844of2017. 
F 
G 
H 
From the Judgment and Order dated 03.12.2014 in 0. P. (KAT) 
No. 117 of2014 and Order dated 09.02.2015 in R. P. No. I 0 of2015 of 
the High Court of Kerala at Emakulam. 
Abhilash M. R., Ranjan Kumar, Advs. for the Appellant. 
Vipin Nair, P. B. Suresh, Abhay Pratap Singh, Advs. for the 
Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
KURIAN, J. I. Leave granted. 
2. The qualification for appointment of Lower Division Typist is 
prescribed in the Notification, which reads as follows :-
"7. Qualifications : 
1. S.S.L.C. or its equivalent qualification. 
510 
BEENA R. v. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION 
511 
[KURIAN, J.] 
2. Lower Grade Certificate in KGTE Malayalam Typewriting. 
A 
3. Lower Grade Certificate in KGTE English Typewriting and 
Computer Word Processing or its equivalent (GO.(P) No.171 
2005/P&ARD dated 09.05.2005. 
Note 1 : Those who have passed KGTE Typewriting before 
January 2002 should produce separate certificate in 
B 
Computer Word Processing or its equivalent. 
Certificates in Computer Word Processing issued by Central, 
State Government Departments/ Agencies/ Societies, 
Universities after successfully completing course of study not 
less than three months duration are considered as equivalent. " 
C 
3. Since the appellant herein possessed only a National Trade 
Certificate, the initial objection was that the same was not the equivalent 
to the prescribed qualification. That objection was recalled by the Public 
Service Commission and the appellant was included in the Rank List at 
Rank No.7. However, an objection was later taken that the Computer 
D 
Word Processing possessed by the appellant is acquired only after the 
last date ofNotification in 2009. 
4. In the case of the appellant, what she possessed is not KGTE 
Typewriting, but the equivalent qualification which has been approved 
by the Public Service Commission, in which case, what she is required is 
only to produce a separate certificate in Computer Word Processing. It 
may be seen that Note 1 says that those who have passed KGTE 
Typewriting before January, 2002, should produce separate certificate 
in Computer Word Processing. It is not in dispute that the appellant 
possesses an equivalent qualification ofKGTE (English) Typewriting, 
E 
F 
but she did not have a separate certificate as far as the Computer Word 
Processing is concerned. No doubt, it is also a prescribed qualification. 
However, relaxation has been granted to those who acquired the 
qualification ofKGTE prior to 2002, for producing a certificate regarding 
Computer Word Processing. Once the word 'produce' is used, it can 
only be at the time of either verification of the records or at the time of G 
written examination or at the time of appointment. In the case of the 
appellant, she had produced the certificate prior to the written examination 
and on the basis of her marks obtained, she has been assigned Rank No. 
7 in the Rank List. Unfortunately, this crucial distinction has not been 
noted in the correct perspective by the High Court. There is also a 
H 
512 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2017] 6 S.C.R. 
. A 
background for this Note. Prior to 2002, Computer Word Processing 
was not otherwise part of the curriculum ofKGTE, it was introduced 
subsequently. That was the reason, the Note was introduced. Those 
who possessed the qualification prior to 2002 should additionally have 
the Computer Word Processing and they should also produce a

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.