JUDGMENT Balakrishna Eradi, C.J. 1. The Kerala Public Service Commission, who was the first respondent in O. P. No. 2331 of 1975, has filed this Writ Appeal against the judgment of a learned single Judge of this Court, allowing that Writ Petition and directing the Kerala Public Service Commission to interview the Writ Petitioner for assessing her suitability for appointment as Assistant Surgeon in the Health Services Department. 2. The Public Service Commission, by a notification dated 12th November 1974, which was published in the Kerala Gazette dated 19th November 1974, had invited applications from candidates possessing the qualifications mentioned therein for recruitment to the cadre of Assistant Surgeon in the Health Services Department. The last date specified therein for the receipt of the applications was 26th December 1974. The qualifications required to be possessed by the candidates were (i) M.B.B.S. Degree, or, if suitable graduates are not available L.M.P. or D.M.S; (ii) One year's House Surgeoncy in an approved Hospital or one year's service as Tutor/Demonstrator in a Medical College; and (iii) Permanent Registration in Class A of Modern Medicine with T. C. Medical Council. According to paragraph 13 (B) of the General Conditions published along with the notification inviting applications, the candidates were also required to forward along with the applications copies of documents in proof of possession, by them, of the specified qualifications. 3. The Writ Petitioner submitted the application within the prescribed time limit, but, her application was not accompanied by any document in proof of possession of the aforementioned qualifications. However, by a letter dated 15th January 1975 sent by her, subsequent to the expiry of the time limit fixed for the receipt of the applications, she forwarded to the Public Service Commission copies of her M.B.B.S. Degree Certificate and also an 'Experience Certificate' showing her experience as House Surgeon. She did not send, even at that stage, any document to prove that she had obtained registration from the Medical Council. By a letter, Ext. P4 dated 21st January 1975, the Public Service Commission informed the Writ Petitioner that her application stood rejected on the ground that it was not accompanied by the necessary documents in proof of qualifications. On 28th January 1975, the Writ Petitioner made a representation to the Commission requesting for a reconsideration of the matter. By a letter, Ext. P4 dated 21st January 1975, the Public Service Commission informed the Writ Petitioner that her application stood rejected on the ground that it was not accompanied by the necessary documents in proof of qualifications. On 28th January 1975, the Writ Petitioner made a representation to the Commission requesting for a reconsideration of the matter. Even along with that letter she did not forward to the Commission any document to prove that she had obtained the registration from the Medical Council. The said representation filed by the Writ Petitioner was rejected by the Public Service Commission, as per its communication, Ext. P6 dated 19th March 1975. The Writ Petition was, therefore, filed by the petitioner seeking to quash Exts. P4 and P6 and praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the Public Service Commission to consider her application as a valid one and to proceed to interview her for selection to the post of Assistant Surgeon. 4. By an interim order dated 20th June 1975 passed by this Court in C.M.P. No. 7077 of 1975 a direction had been issued that, one post of Assistant Surgeon should be kept reserved for being made available to the Writ petitioner in the event of her succeeding in the Writ Petition and thereafter getting selected by the Public Service Commission. When the Writ Petition came up for final hearing the learned Single Judge felt that, in view of the fact that one post of Assistant Surgeon had been kept unfilled in compliance with the interim order aforementioned, and, in view of the further fact that the petitioner had, subsequent to 28th January 1975, produced before the Public Service Commission documents in proof of her having obtained registration from the Medical Council, it was only just and fair that the Commission should interview the petitioner and consider her claims for recruitment to the post that was kept reserved. It is only on the aforesaid basis that the Writ Petition has been allowed by issuing a direction to the said effect. 5. It is only on the aforesaid basis that the Writ Petition has been allowed by issuing a direction to the said effect. 5. In our opinion, the appellant is right in its contention that in as much as the petitioner had failed to comply with the conditions stipulated in the notification regarding production of the documents in proof of possession by her of the prescribed qualifications along with the application submitted by the candidate to the Public Service Commission, the Public Service Commission was acting fully within its rights in rejecting the application, and, no interference was called for by this Court with the orders, Exts. P4 and P6, passed by the Commission. It is not contended by the first respondent that the conditions stipulated by the Public Service Commission in the notification were in any way unreasonable. Such being the case, it was fully within the competence and jurisdiction of the Public Service Commission to determine whether the application submitted by the petitioner was a valid one in the sense of its having conformed to the stipulations contained in the notification and to reject the same on its being found that those conditions were not satisfied by the Writ Petitioner. The mere fact that this Court had passed an interim order directing that one post of Assistant Surgeon must be kept unfilled, so that, in the event of the Writ Petitioner's success, the Writ Petition may not become infructuous, will not, in any way, alter the legal position stated above. Hence, we consider, with respect, that the interference made by the learned Single Judge was not justified. 6. The judgment under appeal is, accordingly, set aside and O.P. No. 2331 of 1975 is hereby dismissed. We make it clear that we are not expressing any opinion whatever on the question as to whether the petitioner was actually possessed of the qualifications prescribed in the notification dated 12th November 1974 for recruitment to the post of Assistant Surgeons. The parties will bear their respective costs.