JUDGMENT :

Pushpa Sathyanarayana, J.

(Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order dated 28.03.2019 in W.P.No.30778 of 2018.)

1. The State filed this appeal seeking to set aside the order of the writ Court dated 28.03.2019 made in W.P.No.30778 of 2018.

2. According to the respondent/writ petitioner, she is a Graduate in Tamil Literature and qualified Technical Teacher in Needlework, Dressmaking and Embroidery. In response to the notification issued by the third appellant in NO.05/2017, she appeared for the examination for the Sewing Teacher post and having secured the requisite marks, she was called for certificate verification, which she attended. In toto she secured 60 marks, i.e., 55 marks in the written examination and 5 marks for employment registration seniority and she belongs to MBC Category. According to her, when persons secured marks lesser than her marks was selected, she was not selected for the post, aggrieved over which, she laid challenge to the Provisional Selection List in the writ petition. The learned Single Judge vide the impugned order dated 28.03.2019 made the following observations and issued the following directions:

“11. Under these circumstances, this Court is of an opinion that as per the online application, the Authorities Competent are bound to verify the medium of instructions in respect of SSLC and HSC / Equivalent. As far as the Technical qualification of Higher Grade Examinations are concerned, the candidates can be considered based on their declaration and based on the certificate verification done by the Competent Authorities at the time of the selection process. However, such undertaking and the statement given by the candidates during the certificate verification process can be verified and scrutinized by the Competent Authorities with the Director of Government Examinations or with any other authorities, if necessary.

12. It is made clear that in the certificate verification form, if any candidate has not opted the medium of instructions, such candidates are not eligible to avail the quota allotted for the persons studied in Tamil Medium. If any of the candidate have not stated that he or she has studied in Tamil Medium, then such candidates are not eligible for the quota as the persons studied in Tamil Medium. In respect of all other candidates who have opted the Tamil quota both in the online application as well as in the certificate verification process in the prescribed format, those candidates can be considered in the PSTM quota and accordingly, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the writ petitioner by verifying the online application as well as in certificate verification in the prescribed format and thereafter, redraw the selection list by providing the quota allotted to the persons studied in Tamil Medium and thereafter, finalize the selection list and appoint the candidates, by following the procedures.”

3. Aggrieved over the said order, the State is before us.

4. The learned State Government Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that another learned Single Judge of Madurai Bench of this Court negatived the similar claim made by the candidates vide order dated 04.12.2018 in W.P.(MD)No.23061 of 2018. Though the said order was brought to the notice of this Court, the impugned order came to be passed without adverting to the said order. The learned State Counsel also relied upon the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in R. Boominathan V. The Government of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretary, Home Department, MANU/TN/7018/2019 and the judgment of the First Bench of this Court in the Secretary, Department of School Education V. R. Vijayalakshmi, MANU/TN/2924/2020. It is his submission that in the latter judgment, the First Bench of this Court set aside the similar order passed by the learned Single Judge and he sought a similar relief.

5. The learned counsel for the respondent/writ petitioner contended that the learned Sin