Back
2014 Supreme(Mad) 1637
High Court of Judicature at Madras
S. NAGAMUTHU, J.
A. Mathiarasi
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Personnel & Administrative Reforms Department, Fort St. George & Another
W.P. Nos. 14410 & 14411 of 2014 & 8069 of 2014 & M.P. No. 1 of 2014
Decided On: 27-06-2014
For the Appearing Parties:Ms. Dakshayani Reddy, R. Rajeswaran, Spl. G.P. R. Muthukumarasamy, Sr. counsel N.S. Nandakumar, Advocates.
Mistake in the selection process leading to the illegal rejection of meritorious candidates warrants rectification by the commission.
Headnote:
Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission - Recruitment Eligibility - Educational Qualification - Selection Process - Mistake in Selection Process
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, graduates in various subjects, were found ineligible for the post of Assistant in the Finance Department but eligible for other posts. They challenged the non-selection, citing the selection of candidates with lower marks and a mistake in the selection process.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners were illegally rejected due to a mistake in the selection process, leading to the selection of undeserving candidates. The court ordered the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission to call the petitioners for Certificate Verification and appoint them as Assistants in the eligible departments.
Issues: Eligibility for recruitment, mistake in the selection process, non-selection of petitioners
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the mistake in the selection process amounted to an illegality depriving the rights of meritorious candidates, and ordered the commission to rectify the error by selecting and appointing the petitioners.
Final Decision: All the writ petitions were allowed, and the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission was directed to call the petitioners for Certificate Verification and appoint them as Assistants in the eligible departments within eight weeks.
1. Since common issues are involved, these writ petitions are heard together and are disposed of by this common order.
2. The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission issued advertisement No.258 calling for applications for direct recruitment to the posts included in Combined Subordinate Services Examination-I (Examination/Service Code No.004). There were as many as 37 posts included in the various departments. Clause 4(B) of the Prospectus speaks of the educational qualification. According to the same, the candidate must possess a degree of B.A. or B.Sc., or B.Com. of any University or institution recognized by the UGC or BOL of Annamalai University or B.B.A. of Madurai Kamaraj University or B.Litt. of Madras University or B.B.M. or B.Litt of Barathiar University. As per Clause 19 of the table given under paragraph No.4(B) of the Prospectus, for the post of Assistants in Registration, Highways, Prison, Police, Transport, Medical and Rural Health Services and in the Divisions of Commercial Taxes Department, the qualification required is any degree. Clause 22 of the said Prospectus states that the qualification for the post of Assistant in Finance Department, in the Tamil Nadu Secretariat, is a Bachelor’s degree in Commerce or Economics or Statistics of any University or Institution recognized by the University Grants Commission.
3. The petitioners are graduates in various subjects other than Commerce or Economics or Statistics. Therefore, they are not eligible for being considered as against the post of Assistant in Finance Department, Tamil Nadu Secretariat Service. But they are eligible for being considered for the post of Assistant in the Department of Registration, Highways, Prison, Police, Transport, Medical and Rural Health Services and in the Divisions of Commercial Taxes Department.
4. The petitioners participated in the written examination, which consists of single paper in General Knowledge, General Tamil and General English and is of three hours duration. Each paper contains 150 marks and total mark is 300. According to the Prospectus, the selection shall be made based on the marks secured in the written examination and in the oral test. 40 marks were ear marked for oral test. The minimum qualifying mark for selection is 102 marks in the written cum oral test and 90 marks in the written test only.
5. The petitioners herein participated in the written examination and secured the written marks as detailed below. Their community and their ranks are also given below (vide counter paragraph No.2)
S.No. W.P. No Reg. No. Name Rank Written Exam Marks Community
1. 14411/2014 00736190 K.Geethalakshmi 4703 229.5 MBC/DC (W)
1. 14410/2014 99858001 A.Mathiarasi 7665 225 SC(W)
2. 18069/2014 14903131 K.Munirathirnam 3854 231 BC(G)
6. According to the petitioners, four other persons by names K.Rama, A.Kavitha, R.Suresh and M.Karuppiah, who had secured lesser marks than petitioners were also called for Certificate Verification, for non-interview posts and were selected, whereas, the petitioners, who have secured 229.5, 225 and 231 were not called for Certificate Verification and they were not selected. It is also stated by the petitioners that one candidate, who has secured 211.50 was selected as against the General Turn, for the post included in Clause 19 of the Prospectus. Thus, according to the petitioners, the non-selection of the petitioners is illegal and therefore, they are before this Court with these writ petitions.
7. In the counter filed by the Joint Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Chennai, the above stand taken by the petitioners is factually admitted. In paragraph No.5 of the counter, it is stated as follows:
“5.It is respectfully submitted that this was the first time that the process of counseling was introduced and due to large volume of candidates had been summoned for counseling, and due to absence of some candidates summoned for counseling and unwillingness expressed by of some candidates during
