JUDGMENT : Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J. Petitioner, a Post Graduate in Paediatric Surgery and stated to be presently working as a Senior Lecturer in Paediatric Surgery in the Government Medical College, Alappuzha on temporary basis, applied for being considered for appointment as Senior Lecturer in Government Medical Colleges in the State of Kerala on regular basis. His application in response to the Public Service Commission's notification was received. But later, on further scrutiny, the PSC found that the photograph as that of the applicant (petitioner herein) uploaded along with the online application, was not in conformity with the PSC's prescriptions. On that ground, the application was rejected. Petitioner's challenge was not accepted by the Kerala Administrative Tribunal, which also quoted two of its earlier orders, which were already affirmed by this Court. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that as against the seven vacancies that are available, there were only four applicants including the petitioner, and the other three are likely to be included as the PSC appears to have decided against the need to have any competitive selection process, having regard to the deficit in the number of applicants as against the available vacancies. In this context, it is pointed out by the petitioner's learned counsel that dearth of hands in the Government Medical Colleges is a matter effecting the paediatric surgery sector, catering to the common people, and on the totality of the facts and circumstances; notwithstanding the earlier orders of the Tribunal and this Court; the situation in hand should be treated as one which the PSC could treat within its powers, as only a minor defect in the application. 3. The learned standing counsel for the PSC shows the judgment in Sasikala T.V. v. Kerala Public Service Commission and Another 2012 (2) KHC 441 pointing out that this Court has held that a defect in the photograph cannot be treated as a minor defect. 4. We are of the view that all such issues are to be primarily considered by the PSC, and the question whether a particular defect is minor or major, depends on the totality of the different aspects in relation to a particular notification and the post to which recruitment is made. 4. We are of the view that all such issues are to be primarily considered by the PSC, and the question whether a particular defect is minor or major, depends on the totality of the different aspects in relation to a particular notification and the post to which recruitment is made. If the petitioner is already working as a Senior Lecturer in Paediatric Surgery in a Government Medical College, and if he is one among the four, who only had responded to the seven vacancies notified by the PSC, we are clear in our mind that the PSC would necessarily have had a fair amount of clear field and area to play its due role, in its wisdom, within the parameters of the Constitution, the relevant statutes, regulations and rules. This is part and parcel of the role of the PSC as the selecting authority for public appointments. 5. Having regard to the precedents referred to by the learned Tribunal, we do not deem it appropriate for the Judiciary to intervene and to say as to what would be a minor or major defect in an application. That is a matter, as stated above, with the PSC. Under such circumstances, we clarify that nothing stated in the impugned order of the Tribunal or in this judgment, would stand in the way of the petitioner making an independent request to the PSC and in such event the PSC would be able to consider all aspects of the matter and to come to an appropriate decision, having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances, including the public need. We also record the request of the petitioner that in the event of his making such an application, the PSC will expedite such application. This original petition is ordered accordingly.