TNPSC Combined Subordinate Services Examination-I கலாந்தாய்வில் குளறுபடி.பாதிக்கப்பட்டவர்களுக்கு பணிநியமனம் வழங்க சென்னை உயர்நீதி மன்றம் உத்தரவு.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF
JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated:27.06.2014

Coram

The Honourable Mr.Justice
S.NAGAMUTHU
W.P.Nos.14410 & 14411 of
2014
And 8069 of 2014
and
M.P.No.1 of 2014(in all the
WPs)
A.Mathiarasi . Petitioner in
W.P.No.14410 of 2014
K.Geethalakshmi Petitioner
in
W.P.No.14411 of 2014
K.Munirathinam Petitioner
in
W.P.No.8069 of 2014
Vs.

1.State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep.by its Secretary to
Government,
Personnel and
Administrative Reforms
Department,
Fort St.George,
Chennai-600 0091.

2.The Secretary,
The Tamil Nadu Public
Service Commission,
Frazer Bridge Road,
Esplanade, George Town,
Chennai-600 003 ..
Respondents in
all the W.Ps.
W.P.No.14410 of 2014:Writ
petition filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of
India, praying for the
issuance of a writ of
mandamus to the second
respondent Commission to
select and appoint the
petitioner in any of the
posts in the Combined
Subordinate Services
Examination-I, notified by
the advertisement No.258 in
the GT Women category or
Scheduled Caste Women
category.
W.P.No.14411 of 2014:Writ
petition filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of
India, praying for the
issuance of a writ of
mandamus to the second
respondent Commission to
select and appoint the
petitioner in any of the
posts in the Combined
Subordinate Services
Examination-I, notified by
the advertisement No.258 in
the GT Women category or
MBC(Women) category.
W.P.No.8069 of 2014:Writ
petition filed under Article
226 of the Constitution of
India, praying for the
issuance of a writ of
mandamus to the second
respondent Commission to
select and appoint the
petitioner in any of the
posts included under the
Combined Subordinate
Services Examination-I,
notified by the
advertisement No.258, dated
30.12.2010.
For Petitioners :
Ms.Dakshayani Reddy
For Respondents:
Mr.R.Rajeswaran,
Spl.G.P.for R1
Mr.R.Muthukumarasamy,Sr.
counsel
For Mr.N.S.Nandakumar, for
TNPSC
For R2
COMMON ORDER
Since common issues are
involved, these writ petitions
are heard together and are
disposed of by this common
order.

2. The Tamil Nadu Public
Service Commission issued
advertisement No.258
calling for applications for
direct recruitment to the
posts included in Combined
Subordinate Services
Examination-I
(Examination/Service Code
No.004). There were as
many as 37 posts included
in the various departments.
Clause 4(B) of the
Prospectus speaks of the
educational qualification.
According to the same, the
candidate must possess a
degree of B.A. or B.Sc., or
B.Com. of any University or
institution recognized by the
UGC or BOL of Annamalai
University or B.B.A. of
Madurai Kamaraj University
or B.Litt. of Madras
University or B.B.M. or
B.Litt of Barathiar
University. As per Clause 19
of the table given under
paragraph No.4(B) of the
Prospectus, for the post of
Assistants in Registration,
Highways, Prison, Police,
Transport, Medical and
Rural Health Services and in
the Divisions of Commercial
Taxes Department, the
qualification required is any
degree. Clause 22 of the
said Prospectus states that
the qualification for the post
of Assistant in Finance
Department, in the Tamil
Nadu Secretariat, is a
Bachelors degree in
Commerce or Economics or
Statistics of any University
or Institution recognized by
the University Grants
Commission.

3. The petitioners are
graduates in various
subjects other than
Commerce or Economics or
Statistics. Therefore, they
are not eligible for being
considered as against the
post of Assistant in Finance
Department, Tamil Nadu
Secretariat Service. But they
are eligible for being
considered for the post of
Assistant in the Department
of Registration, Highways,
Prison, Police, Transport,
Medical and Rural Health
Services and in the
Divisions of Commercial
Taxes Department.

4. The petitioners
participated in the written
examination, which consists
of single paper in General
Knowledge, General Tamil
and General English and is
of three hours duration.
Each paper contains 150
marks and total mark is
300. According to the
Prospectus, the selection
shall be made based on the
marks secured in the written
examination and in the oral
test. 40 marks were ear
marked for oral test. The
minimum qualifying mark
for selection is 102 marks in
the written cum oral test
and 90 marks in the written
test only.

5. The petitioners herein
participated in the written
examination and secured the
written marks as detailed
below. Their community and
their ranks are also given
below (vide counter
paragraph No.2)
S.No W.P.No Reg.No. Name
RankWrittenExam marks/
Community

1. 14411/ 2014 00736190
K.Geethalakshmim4703
229.5 MBC/DC(W)

2 14410/ 2014 99858001
A.Mathiarasi 7665' 225 SC
(W)

3 . 18069/ 2014 14903131
K.Munirathirnam 3854. 231
BC(G)

6. According to the
petitioners, four other
persons by names K.Rama,
A.Kavitha, R.Suresh and
M.Karuppiah, who had
secured lesser marks than
petitioners were also called
for Certificate Verification,
for non-interview posts and
were selected, whereas, the
petitioners, who have
secured 229.5, 225 and 231
were not called for
Certificate Verification and
they were not selected. It is
also stated by the
petitioners that one
candidate, who has secured
211.50 was selected as
against the General Turn, for
the post included in Clause
19 of the Prospectus. Thus,
according to the petitioners,
the non-selection of the
petitioners is illegal and
therefore, they are before
this Court with these writ
petitions.

7.In the counter filed by the
Joint Secretary, Tamil Nadu
Public Service Commission,
Chennai, the above stand
taken by the petitioners is
factually admitted. In
paragraph No.5 of the
counter, it is stated as
follows:

5.It is respectfully
submitted that this was the
first time that the process of
counseling was introduced
and due to large volume of
candidates had been
summoned for counseling,
and due to absence of some
candidates summoned for
counseling and
unwillingness expressed by
of some candidates during
counseling, the petitioners
have been omitted from
being taken which is purely
a genuine mistake.
Counseling system now in
practice has been modified
appropriately and such
mistake will not occur now.
The above petitioners as
indicated will be
accommodated in the next
phase of counseling.

8. The learned Senior
counsel appearing for the
Tamil Nadu Public Service
Commission
Mr.R.Muthukumarasamy,
would submit that these
petitioners would be called
for Certificate Verification
and they will be selected
and later appointed based
on their marks because they
have secured more marks
than the cut off marks. The
said statement is recorded.

9.In this case, in the original
counter filed on 2.4.2014,
the TNPSC has tried to
justify the non-selection of
these petitioners. The stand
then taken was that the cut
off mark was differently
fixed for the candidates who
have opted to be appointed
in Finance Department and
the candidates, who opted to
be appointed in the
Departments as enumerated
in clause 19 of the
Prospectus. In other words,
according to the stand taken
by the TNPSC, for the posts
of Assistants in Finance
Department, the cut off
mark was 229.5, whereas,
for the posts included in
clause 19 of the Prospectus,
it was 231. It was also
submitted in the counter
that some of the candidates,
who were called for
Certificate Verification for
the posts of Assistants in
Finance Department, at the
time of counseling, opted to
go to public Departments
and therefore, they were
selected as against those
posts though the cut off
mark was higher.

10. The learned counsel for
the petitioners
Ms.Dhakshayani Reddy,
however, pointed out from
the records available, that
one candidate, who had
secured 211.50 has been
selected as against the
posts included in Clause 19.
At that juncture, the TNPSC
offered to file another
affidavit. It is accordingly,
today, the affidavit dated
26.6.2014 has been filed,
wherein, as I have extracted
herein above, in paragraph
No.5, the TNPSC has
admitted the mistake
committed by them. It is
now the admitted case of
the TNPSC itself that the
candidates who have
secured the cut off mark for
the post of Assistants in
Finance Department, ought
not have been considered
against the post included in
clause 19, because, for
clause 19, the cut off mark
was higher than the cut of
mark prescribed for
Assistants in Finance
Department.

11. From the above tacit
admission made by the
TNPSC, it is certain that
many candidates like the
petitioners ought to have
been selected have not been
selected, whereas, many
candidates who ought not to
have been selected have
been unduly selected. This
is not a mere procedural
irregularity, but an illegality
depriving the rights of the
meritorious candidates.

12. It is not known to the
Court as to how many
candidates have been
affected and how many
candidates have been
unduly selected and
appointed. At this length of
time, in my considered
opinion, it is not possible to
repair the loss or error
committed by the TNPSC,
fully. It is also not possible
at this length of time to
cancel the entire selection,
so as to issue a direction to
the TNPSC to hold a fresh
verification session.
Therefore, as has been
admitted in paragraph No.5
of the counter, since the
petitioners, who have been
illegally rejected are now
assured selection and
appointment, I do not want
to probe further and I wish
to confine the relief only to
the petitioners in this
matter. I am only hopeful
that the TNPSC, which has
got its own tradition, will
avoid any such mistake in
future, because, a single
mistake committed by the
TNPSC may result in huge
loss and mental agony to
many deserving candidates,
who toil much to purchase
books, prepare for the
examination and write the
examination. But for the
affidavit today filed,
conceding to the mistake
committed by the TNPSC,
this Court would have even
gone to the extent of issuing
a direction for a detailed
probe, but I desist from
doing so hoping that the
TNPSC will not allow any
such mistake to occur in
future.

13. In the result, all the writ
petitions are allowed. The
Tamil Nadu Public Service
Commission, as undertaken
before this Court, shall call
the petitioners soon for
Certificate Verification,
select them if they satisfy
all the other requirements
and appoint them as
Assistants in any one of the
Departments enumerated
under Clause 19 of the
Prospectus. The said
exercise shall be completed
within eight weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of
this order. No costs.
Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petitions are
closed.

27.06.2014
Msk
Index:Yes
Internet:Yes

To

1.The Secretary to
Government,
Personnel and
Administrative Reforms
Department,
Fort St.George,
Chennai-600 0091.

2.The Secretary,
The Tamil Nadu Public
Service Commission,
Frazer Bridge Road,
Esplanade, George Town,
Chennai-600 003

S.NAGAMUTHU,J.