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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 6139

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr.Justice HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
R.Pushparani – Appellant
Versus
The Secretary – Respondent



##PAGE1##

WP No. 28951 of 2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 28-01-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

WP No. 28951 of 2016

R.Pushparani

Section Officer,

Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission,

Chennai-3.

..Petitioner(s)

Vs

The Secretary

Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission,

Chennai-3.

..Respondent(s)

PRAYER : To call for the records of the respondent in No.777/ PD-E1/2014

dated 26.8.2015 and quash the same as far as the petitioner is concerned and

direct the respondent to promote the petitioner as Under Secretary in the List for

the year 2015 on par with her immediate junior and grant her all service and

monetary benefits

For Petitioner(s): M/s.M.Muthappan

M.Alagu Goutham

For Respondent(s): Mr.B.Vijay,

Standing Counsel.

__________

Page1 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/02/2026 12:03:32 pm )

##PAGE2##

WP No. 28951 of 2016

ORDER

The writ petitioner challenges the proceedings No.7777/PD-E1/2014,

dated 26.08.2015, issued by the respondent – Tamil Nadu Public Service

Commission (hereinafter referred to as “TNPSC” for the sake of brevity and

convenience), whereby the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the post of

Under Secretary was rejected.

2. After completing S.S.L.C., the petitioner was appointed as a Typist in

March 1977 on a temporary basis. Her services were regularised on 25.06.1984,

and she was promoted to the post of Assistant in the year 1995. Subsequently,

G.O.Ms.No.7, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (M) Department, dated

04.01.1996, was issued by the Government, by which the post of Assistant was

redesignated as Assistant Section Officer. In the year 1998, the petitioner

obtained an M.A. degree without completing the +2 course and without

possessing an undergraduate degree. The petitioner was promoted to the post of

Section Officer on 19.02.2007.

3. G.O.Ms.No.107, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department,

dated 18.08.2009, was issued by the Government, prescribing 10+2+3 as the

requisite qualification for promotion to the post of Under Secretary. The

petitioner completed a two-year Foundation Course in May 2010 and thereafter

obtained a B.A. degree through distance education in May 2013. Subsequently,

__________

Page2 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/02/2026 12:03:32 pm )

##PAGE3##

WP No. 28951 of 2016

the respondent drew up the panel for promotion to the post of Under Secretary.

However, the petitioner’s name was not included in the said panel/impugned

proceedings, which necessitated her to approach this Court by filing the present

writ petition.

4. Mr.M.Muthappan, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that as

per G.O.Ms.No.107, dated 18.08.2009, which was subsequently incorporated as

Rule 19 of the Tamil Nadu State Subordinate Service Rules, the qualification

prescribed for recruitment by transfer to the post of Under Secretary is 10+2+3.

Since the petitioner possessed the said qualification as on the relevant date, the

denial of her claim is arbitrary, discriminatory, and violative of Articles 14 and

16 of the Constitution of India.

5. Learned counsel further submitted that the two-year Foundation

Course completed by the petitioner is treated as equivalent to the Higher

Secondary (+2) course, as per G.O.Ms.No.219, Personnel and Administrative

Reforms Department, dated 30.03.1988. Therefore, the contention of TNPSC

that the Foundation Course is not equivalent to +2 is untenable. In support of his

submissions, learned counsel placed reliance on the judgment of a Division

Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1372 of 2013, dated 12.07.2015.

6. Per contra, Mr. B. Vijay, learned Standing Counsel for TNPSC,

submitted that the petitioner does not possess the requisite qualification for

promotion to the post of Under Secretary. According to him, the petitioner

obtained her degrees in a reverse pattern, contrary to the Government Orders

__________

Page3 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/02/2026 12:03:32 pm )

##PAGE4##

WP No. 28951 of 2016

and Rules in force as on the date when the

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