SEKAR REPORTER

Court News from Madras High Court

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM   W.P.No.27431 of 2017 and W.M.P.No.29320 of 2017   D.Elangovan           For Petitioner     : Mr.M.Gnanasekar                                           for Mr.S.Ashok kumar                                         For Respondents : Mrs.S.Mythreye Chandru                                          Special Government Pleader          ORDER       13.Thus, this Court is of an opinion that the writ petitioner was denied an opportunity without any valid or acceptable reason and he is eligible and entitled for selection or appointment, since other candidates who scored lesser marks than that of the petitioner were selected and appointed. For all these reasons, the writ petition is to be considered.     

by · Published · Updated

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

 

DATED: 29.09.2022

 

CORAM:

                                                 

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

 

W.P.No.27431 of 2017

and

W.M.P.No.29320 of 2017

 

D.Elangovan                                                  … Petitioner

 

Vs.

 

  1. The Director of School Education,

College Road, DPI Campus,

Nungambakkam,

Chennai – 600 006.

 

  1. The Chief Education Office,

Room.No.513, 5th Floor,

Collectorate Office Campus,

Palladam Road,

Tiruppur – 641 604.                                     … Respondents

 

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner to the post of Lab Assistant in the category of intercaste priority quota/any other quota in accordance with the marks obtained by the petitioner in pursuant to the notification issued by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.2418/A-1/2015 dated 21.04.2015.

 

For Petitioner     : Mr.M.Gnanasekar

for Mr.S.Ashok kumar

 

For Respondents : Mrs.S.Mythreye Chandru

Special Government Pleader

 

ORDER

 

The Writ of Mandamus has been instituted to direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner in the post of Lab Assistant under the intercaste priority quota.

 

  1. The petitioner participated in the process of selection pursuant to the notification issued by the respondents for selection and appointment to the post of Lab Assistant.

 

  1. The petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste (SC) Community and his marriage is an intercaste marriage. The marriage was solemnized on 07.09.2014 and the petitioner registered the intercaste marriage in the office of the Sub-Registrar at Dharapuram in S.No.1 of 2015 and the Tahsildar, Dharapuram issued a Certificate dated 19.05.2017, confirming the intercaste marriage.

4.The petitioner enrolled his name in the District Employment Office, Tiruppur as early as on 13.06.2003 and his Registration Number is TPD2003M100002061.

 

  1. The petitioner scored 115 marks in the process of selection. The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that the candidates who scored lower marks than the petitioner were selected and appointed. But the case of the writ petitioner was not considered on the ground that he had not furnished the original copy of the SSLC Book and the Intercaste Marriage Certificate.

 

  1. The petitioner states that xerox copy of the SSLC Book has already been furnished but the Intercaste Marriage Certificate was not issued despite the fact that the petitioner registered his name before the District Employment Exchange under the intercaste marriage quota.

 

  1. The process of selection to the post of Lab Assistant was conducted by inviting the name of eligible candidates from the District Employment Exchange concerned and also by issuing a notification. Therefore, the employment registration was also taken into consideration for the purpose of conduct of selection. The employment registration card submitted by the petitioner reveals that he has registered his name under the intercaste marriage quota and he submitted his application under the priority category of intercaste marriage.

 

  1. Thus, it is not in dispute that the petitioner registered his name in the District Employment Exchange in the year 2003 itself and the intercaste marriage of the petitioner was also registered in the District Employment Exchange for availing the priority quota. Further, it is not in dispute that the writ petitioner submitted a copy of the SSLC book at the time of selection. However, he could not able to submit the original as it was misplaced.

 

9.But, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the original certificates were produced, subsequently. There was a delay in getting the Intercaste Marriage Certificate from the authority. Though, he registered his name before the District Employment Exchange as he is an intercaste marriage person, the candidates who scored lesser mark than the petitioner were selected and appointed.

  1. The learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents made a submission that the petitioner was not considered on account of the fact that he failed to furnish the original SSLC Book and the Intercaste Marriage Certificate. But, it is not in dispute that the petitioner furnished the Employment Registration Card which reveals that the petitioner registered his name under the intercaste marriage quota.

 

  1. Therefore, the genuineness of the petitioner regarding the priority category is not in dispute. Further, the petitioner has submitted the copy of the SSLC Book at the time of selection but the originals were produced at the later point of time.

 

  1. That apart, the selection was conducted by the Chief Educational Officer at Tiruppur. The mode of selection was through District Employment Exchange and through open process. That being the process adopted, a candidate who scored highest marks of 115 need not be denied merely on the ground that he took some more time to furnish the original copy of the SSLC Book and the Intercaste Marriage Certificate. However, the fact remains that the intercaste marriage was registered in the District Employment Exchange and the Employment Exchange Registration Card was also produced before the competent authority.

 

13.Thus, this Court is of an opinion that the writ petitioner was denied an opportunity without any valid or acceptable reason and he is eligible and entitled for selection or appointment, since other candidates who scored lesser marks than that of the petitioner were selected and appointed. For all these reasons, the writ petition is to be considered.

 

  1. Accordingly, this writ petition stands allowed with a direction to the respondents to select and appoint the petitioner to the post of Lab Assistant in Tiruppur District and issue appropriate orders of appointment, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

 

29.09.2022

Index:Yes

Internet:Yes

Speaking order

rgm/ssr

 

 

 

 

To

 

  1. The Director of School Education,

College Road, DPI Campus,

Nungambakkam,

Chennai – 600 006.

 

  1. The Chief Education Office,

Room.No.513, 5th Floor,

Collectorate Office Campus,

Palladam Road,

Tiruppur – 641 604.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

 

ssr

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

W.P.No.27431 of 2017

and

W.M.P.No.29320 of 2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

29.09.2022

 

You may also like...