P MURUGAN Vs. SECRETARY TAMILNADU PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN pursuance to the notification dated 18.12.2007, applications have been invited from the eligible candidates for the appointment by direct recruitment to the post of Principal, Industrial Training Institute / Assistant Director of Training in the Tamilnadu Employment and Training Service 2005-2006.

(2.) THE petitioner with register number 00102079 was one of the candidates applied to the said post. As per the notification, the following qualifications have been stipulated for the candidates:

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has completed Post Diploma in Auto mobile Engineering awarded by the State Board of Technical Education and Training, which has been recognised by the University Grants Commission. A reliance has been made by the learned counsel on clause 9 of the instruction given to the candidates. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the second part of clause 9 is applicable to the present case. In so far as the first part of clause 9 is concerned it only deals with higher or equivalent qualification already declared by the State Government in consultation with the committee. Regarding the second part of clause 9, the petitioner has complied with the condition imposed therein by producing the equivalence certificate from the competent authority as early as on 11.01.2010. The Centre for Academic Course, Anna University, Chennai has issued the said certificate to the respondent in pursuance to the petitioner's request stating that the Diploma and Post Diploma Course in Automobile Engineering awarded by the State Board of Technical Education and Training is equivalent to Diploma in Automobile Engineering of MIT, Chennai. A further statement has been made that when such a certificate is produced it shall be generally accepted. There is no other mechanism to reject the certificate. It is not as if the said certificate is not genuine or true. Therefore, in such an eventuality the very action of the respondent to refer the matter to Equivalence Committee, which in turn has not recommended the same to the Government cannot be accepted.