The Commission cannot extend or revive a ranked list that has already expired.

The petitioners were included in district-wise ranked lists for the post of Assistant Salesman in the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation, prepared pursuant to a single PSC notification.

The lists were published on different dates and some expired before 25 May 2026.

After the State Government recommended extending lists due to the Assembly election notification, the PSC decided on 25 May 2026 to extend the validity of ranked lists then in force until 30 November 2026.

The petitioners’ lists had already expired and were not extended.

They sought the benefit of the extension, relying on a Division Bench decision concerning candidates selected pursuant to the same notification.

1. Whether the PSC could extend, under the fifth proviso to Rule 13 of its Rules of Procedure, ranked lists that had expired before the Commission decided to extend lists.

2. Whether the extension granted to lists still in force, but not to the petitioners’ expired lists, amounted to impermissible discrimination.

The fifth proviso to Rule 13 of the Kerala Public Service Commission Rules of Procedure authorises the Commission to keep alive ranked lists that are due to expire; it does not authorise revival or revalidation of lists that have already expired.

In K. Thulaseedharan v. Kerala State Public Service Commission, (2007) 6 SCC 190, the Supreme Court held that this power applies only to a ranked list still subsisting when the Commission decides to extend it, and that past instances of extending expired lists cannot create a legal right.

The Court considered Kerala Public Service Commission v. Manoj Kumar K, judgment dated 1 March 2018 in O.P.(KAT) No. 323 of 2017 and connected cases, but held that it could not be read as departing from the Supreme Court’s ruling.

The petitioners’ ranked lists had expired before the PSC’s decision of 25 May 2026.

Applying K. Thulaseedharan, the Court held that the fifth proviso permits continuation of a live list, not revival of an expired one.

The Government’s recommendation did not itself extend the lists; the decision rested with the Commission.

The Court therefore declined to apply Manoj Kumar K in a way that would conflict with the Supreme Court’s rule, notwithstanding the petitioners’ claim that candidates under the same notification were treated differently.

Finding no legal basis to grant the relief sought, it dismissed the writ petition.