The court emphasized the need for fair and merit-based selection processes and ordered the TNPSC to rectify the flawed selection, initiate disciplinary proceedings against responsible officials, and conduct an In-house enquiry to avoid similar issues in the future.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act, to set aside the order, dated 05.01.2017 made in W.P.No.6842 of 2013 and dismiss the above writ petition.

Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondent for having committed wilful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.6842 of 2013, dated 05.01.2017.)

Common Judgment:

R. Suresh Kumar, J.

1. Since this Intra Court Appeal and the Contempt Petition arise out of the order passed by the learned Judge in the writ petition, dated 05.01.2017, both the Writ Appeal as well as the Contempt Petition were heard together and are disposed of by this common order. and Cont.P.No.2271 of 2017.

2. This Intra Court Appeal is directed against the order passed by the writ court, dated 05.01.2017 made in W.P.No.6842 of 2013.

3. The short facts leading to filing of this writ appeal reads thus :

(i) That the appellant Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (in short the "TNPSC") had issued Advertisement Nos.258, dated 30.12.2010 and 265, dated 08.02.2011 respectively and further issued Advertisement No.280, dated 11.06.2011.

(ii) These notifications were issued by the TNPSC inviting applications from eligible candidates for direct recruitment to the post included in Combined Subordinate Services Examination-I, which is otherwise called as Group-II Examination.

(iii) The third advertisement, dated 11.06.2011 was issued because some more posts additionally were added to be filled up. and Cont.P.No.2271 of 2017.

(iv) The respondent was one of the candidate who made application for the said selection process to the appellant / TNPSC. There are two type of posts, one is interview post and another one is non-interview post. Insofar as the non-interview post is concerned, based on the marks obtained by the candidates in the written examination selection will be made by applying the 69% communal reservation. Insofar as the interview post is concerned, after the written examination by applying the rule of reservation, candidates would be called for interview and the marks they obtained in both the written examination and interview will be taken together and accordingly, selection would be made for interview post.

(v) In respect of certain posts which are meant for the non-interview post, the marks obtained by the petitioner was considered under the category namely, Backward Classes Muslim (G) [BCM(G)].

(vi) Insofar as the BCM(G) is concerned, according to the TNPSC there were 69 posts earmarked, 8 posts were reserved for women and 28 posts were reserved for Destitute Widows, therefore the remaining 33 posts and Cont.P.No.2271 of 2017 would be filled up from among the BCM(G) category. These posts are noninterview posts, therefore the only criteria to be followed for selection is based on the marks obtained by the candidates in the written examination.

(vii) After the written examination was over, the cut-off marks was declared for each category and insofar as the category of the respondent is concerned, since he belongs to BCM and he is a male candidate he can only compete for the posts earmarked for BCM(G). For the said category, the cutoff mark was 223.50, it means that, the last candidate who has to be selected from the category of BCM(G) for these non-interview posts must have secured 223.50 and those who secured lesser marks than 223.50 marks would not be selected.

(viii) It is the case of the respondent that, he secured 223.50 marks, despite he having secured such marks he was not called for selection process and his name was not considered for selection, therefore in order to consider his candidature for selection, the respondent / writ petitioner had given a representation to the TNPSC on 20.12.2012.