M PALANISAMY Vs. TAMIL NADU PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THIS is yet another writ petition relating to selection to the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, First Class, in which the petitioner has sought for a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the first respondent in respect of the supplemental Notification issued in Memorandum No. 10163/APD-CJ. B/96, dated 24.4.1997. and quash paragraph No.8 of the Notification so far it relates to fixing of the ratio of 1:3 for viva voce examination, and consequently direct the respondent to publish the results of the written examination and call for viva voce examination in the ratio of 1:6 as laid down in the Tamil Nadu State Judicial Service Rules, 1995.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner strongly contended that the fixing of the ration 1:3 in calling the candidates for viva voce examination by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission was wholly illegal and arbitrary. In support of this submission the learned counsel stated that Rule 5 (4) of Tamil Nadu State Judicial Service (Cadre & Recruitment) Rules, 1995 (for short,'the rules'), dealing with the method of appointment, qualification, and age, did not authorise first respondent to fix the ratio as 1:3 to call for candidates for viva voce examination; on the other hand in the second proviso, ratio is fixed as 1:6 when the recruitment is to be made on the basis of viva voce test either the State Government or the first respondent have no power to issue administrative instructions or orders so as to contradict the rules framed. THE learned counsel also drew our attention to Article 234, and proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, and also cited few decisions in support of this submission.