P. Sam Koshy, J
1. Challenge in the present writ petition is to the alleged action on the part of the respondents in returning the application form which the petitioner had
sent by courier for filling up of the post of Assistant Law Officer under the respondents.
2. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner had sent his application by courier and the same was duly received by the
respondents and thereafter they have returned it back without any endorsement. He has relied upon the seal of the respondents upon which the
whitener has been applied, as is evident from the original envelope enclosed along with the writ petition, Annexure P-4.
3. Without entering into that area of dispute as to whether it has been properly received by the respondents or not, this Court is of the opinion that the
petitioner has not applied in accordance with the terms and conditions of the advertisement. Clause 4 of the said advertisement clearly stipulates that
the petitioner was supposed to move an application by registered post or by speed post. There was no other third option made available. In the
absence of availing the said option if the petitioner has taken the risk of sending an application by the third mode which has been rejected, the same
cannot be said to be in any manner bad in law.
4. The writ petition thus being devoid of merits the same deserves to be and is accordingly dismissed.
