SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 13791

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.Subramanian, G.Arul Murugan, JJ.
The Secretary to Government, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department and ors. - Appellants
Versus
K.Manonmani - Respondent
W.A.Nos.3809 & 3816 of 2024 and 14 of 2025 and C.M.P.Nos.29979 & 30051 of 2024 & 63 of 2025
Decided On : 18-02-2025
Advocate Appeared :
For the Appellant : Mr.P.Kumaresan, Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.S.Venkateswaran, Special Government Pleader
For the Respondent : Mr.S.Kamadevan

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr.P.Kumaresan, Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.S.Venkateswaran, Special Government Pleader
For the Respondent: Mr.S.Kamadevan

The age limit for appointment can be extended for Scheduled Caste candidates, allowing eligibility despite being over the standard age limit.

Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016 - Section 20(8) - Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Basic Service - Age limit for appointment of Cooks - Respondents were appointed as Cooks but were over-aged according to the initial interpretation of the rules. However, the writ Court found that the respondents were entitled to an age extension of 5 years under the proviso to Section 20(8) due to their Scheduled Caste status, allowing them to be eligible for appointment despite being over the initial age limit of 35 years. (Paras 3-7)

(B) Educational Qualification - The requirement for the post of Cook is merely the ability to read and write Tamil, which the respondents met. The production of a Transfer Certificate was deemed inconsequential for disqualification. (Paras 8-9)

Facts of the case:
The State appealed against the quashing of cancellation orders for the appointment of respondents as Cooks, who were initially deemed over-aged. The writ Court ruled in favor of the respondents, citing applicable age extensions.

Findings of Court:
The writ Court's decision to quash the cancellation orders was upheld, confirming the respondents' eligibility for appointment.

Issues: The main issues were whether the respondents were over-aged for appointment and the validity of the Transfer Certificate produced by one respondent.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the age limit could be extended for Scheduled Caste candidates, and the educational qualification requirement was satisfied.

Result: Writ Appeals dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.

Since all the Writ Petitions were disposed of by a common order, the appeals are also taken up together and disposed of by this common order.

2. The State is on appeal against the orders of the writ Court quashing the cancellation of appointment of the respondents in all these Writ Appeals, on the ground that the respondents were over aged on the date of appointment and on the ground that the respondent in W.A.No.3809 of 2024 has produced a false Transfer Certificate.

3. All the respondents were appointed as Cooks in the hostels attached to the Adi-dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department. The appointment orders were issued on 26.02.2021. The orders impugned in the Writ Petitions came to be passed on 19.04.2023. The writ Court had found that the respondents were not over aged, on a reading of Rule 5 of the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Basic Service read with Section 20(8) of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016 .

4. It is not in dispute that the posts to which the respondents were appointed are covered by the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Basic Service. For the post of 'Cook' the educational qualification is that a person should be able to read and write Tamil. Rule 5(1) prescribes an age-limit of 30 years on the date of appointment. Proviso to Rule 5(1) grants an additional 5 years to candidates who belong to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes. Therefore, the upper age limit as per the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Basic Service is 35 years. Admittedly, all the respondents were aged above 35 years on the date of their appointments. Therefore, the order impugned came to be passed cancelling their appointments. The writ Court found that proviso to sub-section (8) of Section 20 of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016 would apply and there would be an extension of another 5 years for the post to which the respondents had been appointed. The first proviso to sub- section (8) of Section 20 reads as follows:-

Provided that, for direct recruitment to a post included in a service for which the minimum qualification required is not higher than the minimum general educational qualification, the age limit prescribed shall be increased by five years in respect of candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes or in respect of destitute widows of all castes, who do not possess a general educational qualification, which is higher than the minimum general educational qualification;

5. Rule 5(1) of the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Basic Service, which deals with 'Age' reads as follows:-

(1) Age: Candidates for appointment by direct recruitment to any of the posts other than those in Classes I and II must not have completed 30 years of age on the date of appointment.

Explanation:-

For the purpose of the sub-rule, the age limit, in the case of candidate appointed through Employment Exchange, be reckoned from the date of sponsoring of the candidate by the Employment Exchange concerned for appointment to the post.

Provided that a candidate belonging to the Scheduled Caste or the Scheduled Tribe shall be eligible for appointment to the above classes if he has not completed 35 years of age on the date of appointment.

Provided further that the age limit aforesaid shall not apply to the appointment of Ex-servicemen to any category.

*Provided also that the age limit shall not apply to the appointment made to this service from among the employees borne on the contingent establishment in the same department brought into regular establishment on completion of five years of service.

*(Inserted in G.O.Ms.No.677, P&AR (Per.F)Dept., dt.1.7.85)

Provided also that the age-limit shall not apply to appointment by direct recruitment from among Process Servers and Process Amins of the Revenue Department.

Provided also that the age-limit aforesaid shall not apply in the case of appointment of any person transferred from a local fund or municipal institution in consequence of th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top