G.KARTHICK Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Writ Petition had been filed by the petitioner, in the nature of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the second respondent Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission relating to the notification of distribution of vacancies published on their website with regard to the allocation of vacancies within BC Tamil medium category and the consequential list of candidates selected for interview posts published on 09.10.2012 and the consequential list of candidates selected for non interview posts on 20.11.2012 and quash the same in so far as the non inclusion of the petitioner in the said lists and consequently direct the second respondent commission to allocate the posts within BC Tamil medium category following the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Services Rule 21b and Rule 21(ab) and confine the allocation for women to 30% and to Ex-servicemen to 5% respectively and consequently direct the second respondent commission to select and appoint the petitioner to an interview post in Tamil Nadu Combined Subordinate Service examination-I notified by the second respondent vide advertisement No.258 dated 30.12.2010 and supplement adv. No. 265, dated 08.02.2011.

(2.) The writ petitioner had applied for the Combined Subordinate Services Examination - I (Examination Service Code No. 004) for which advertisements were issued on 30.12.2010 and 08.02.2011 by the second respondent, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission. In the said advertisement, 16 categories of posts in the interview category and 22 categories of posts in the non-interview category were called for. The number of vacancies notified were 6695 out of which 2701 were for interview posts and 3991 were for non-interview posts. The petitioner belonged to Backward Class community and had also studied in Tamil Medium. He passed Bachelor of Literature in Tamil from Annamalai University in the year 2009 in first Class. For interview posts, selection would be in two stages, namely, written examination and oral test. For non-interview posts, selection would be made only on the basis of the total marks in the written examination. The petitioner obtained 229.5 marks in the written examination. The cut off marks for Backward Class Tamil Medium for common degree posts was 228, for ASO Finance was 204 and for Junior Co-operative Auditor was 225. The petitioner was called for certificate verification on 25.06.2012 and for oral test on 27.06.2012. The petitioner obtained 27 marks in the oral test and thus, totally obtained 256.5 marks totally. When the list of candidates was published on 09.10.2012 for counselling, the petitioner's name did not find place. When the list for non-interview posts was published on 20.11.2012, the petitioner's name was not found. The petitioner thereafter gave a representation. It was stated that the second respondent Commission had not selected the candidates in accordance with rules. The petitioner stated that the candidates, who had obtained lesser marks than him had been selected. It was also stated that he should be given priority because he studied in Tamil Medium. The Writ Petition had been filed in the nature of certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the second respondent Public Service Commission and direct the second respondent to allocate the post with BCC Tamil Medium category following Tamilnadu State and Subordinate Rule 21(B) and 21(ab) and direct the second respondent to select and appoint the petitioner to an interview post.

(3.) The second respondent filed a counter and an additional counter affidavit. In the counter affidavit filed by E.Sugumaran, Joint Secretary of Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Chennai, it had been stated that the petitioner had obtained 229.50 marks in the written examination and 27 marks in the oral test. He belonged to the category of Backward Class (G) and PSTM. It had been stated that more than one month was taken to fill up the vacancies in the oral test. It had been further stated in paragraph No. 7 as follows:- "7. It is submitted that the candidates were picked up against each communal category first for common posts, then for Assistant in Finance Department, Assistant in Law Department, Personal Clerk in Finance Department and Personal Clerk in Secretariat other than Finance Department as per the sequence mentioned above, based on the qualifications possessed by the candidates. In the process, certain candidates who have obtained lesser marks, than those who possess common qualifications, have been admitted to counselling by virtue of possessing specific qualification(s) prescribed for the posts other than common posts, as candidates who possess common qualification cannot be selected for the special qualification posts."? (Emphasis supplied)