BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.03.2025 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN W.P.(MD)No.14334 of 2019 and W.M.P.(MD)No.10762 of 2019 R.Krishnasamy ... Petitioner Vs.

The Asstt.Commissioner, (District Revenue)

Commercial Tax Department, Commercial Tax Complex, Madurai Road, Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District-626 001. ... Respondent PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the respondent's impugned notification dated 11.07.2018 and consequential notification No.Rc.No.A8/5466/2018 dated 10.07.2018 and consequential Communication Na.Ka.A1/1960/2018 dated 31.01.2019, as null and void since it violates Article 14 of Constitution of India and direct the respondent to consider the petitioner for the said post under educational qualification of 8^th Std. Passed and physically disabled quota by considering the petitioner's representation dated

07.01.2019, within the period stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Haja Mohideen For Respondent : Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh, Additional Government Pleader.

ORDER

Under assail is the notification dated 11.07.2018 issued by the first respondent and consequential communication dated 31.01.2019.

2.The case of the writ petitioner is that the petitioner is a physically disabled person with 40% disability of difficulty in right hand. He belongs to Hindu Pallar Community. The respondent issued the impugned notification dated 11.07.2018 for the post of Office Assistant with the qualification of 8^th Std. Pass, in which, they have stated in Clause-8 that physically disabled have to produce suitable certificate for the same. He applied with necessary certificate. He came to know about the consequential impugned communication dated 10.07.2018 that in Clause-5, there is no allotment for physically disabled person. Hence, he sent a petition to the District Collector on 07.01.2019. The respondent informed on 25.10.2018 interview was held and 14 persons were selected and they were given appointment. No one was selected under physically disabled quota. Thus, the selection process was not fair and it violate Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Hence, this writ petition.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that in Clause 8 of the impugned notification dated 11.07.2018, it has been stated that physically disabled person have to produce suitable certificate for the post of Office Assistant. However, in Clause-5 of the consequential impugned communication dated 10.07.2018, there is no allotment for physically disabled person. If the respondents have taken note of 8^th Std. Passed candidate and physically disabled category, then the petitioner may got a chance for employment.

4.Per contra, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent would submit that the appointment was made based on the opinion of the appointment committee constituted for this purpose. The quota referred by the petitioner was not available in the roaster at that point of time. However, one physically disabled candidate has been appointed in the general turn category on merits.

5.This Court has considered the submissions made on either side and perused the available records.

6.It is seen from the records that the respondent issued notification dated 11.07.2018 for the post of Office Assistant and and the recruitment of persons fill up 14 posts in the post of Office Assistant Cadre. In the notification in Clause 8, it has been stated that physically disabled candidates have to produce suitable certificate. In Clause-5(6) of the consequential impugned communication dated 10.07.2018 issued by the respondent, it has been stated that the recruitment authority viz the respective Deputy Commissioner of respective CT District shall strictly follow the rule of reservation and roster of appointment as stipulated above as per the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of