M.Chinnamuthu v. The Tamil Nadu Public Commission,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 15.03.2024 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA Writ Petition No.1674 of 2021 M.Chinnamuthu ...
Petitioner -VsThe Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Represented by its Secretary, Chennai - 600 003.
...
Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider and pass order on the petitioner's representation dated 10.01.2018 and 12.09.2019 regarding selection to the post of VAO. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Sarath Kumar For Respondent : Mrs.G.Hema Standing Counsel
ORDER
Heard Mr.M.Sarath Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.G.Hema, the learned Standing Counsel, for the respondent.
2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking a writ of 1/4
mandamus directing the respondent to consider and pass order on the petitioner's representation dated 10.01.2018 and 12.09.2019 regarding selection to the post of VAO.
3. In response to the notification issued in the year 2010 calling for application to the post of "Villlage Administrative Officer", the petitioner had applied to the post and participated in the selection process. The petitioner had secured 264 marks and he falls under the MBC / DC(G) Category I. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite a reserve list was published on 08.10.2004 and the petitioner had possessed the required qualification by securing 264 marks, he was not selected to the post.
4. Mr.M.Sarath Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, claims that the persons who have got marks lesser than the petitioner have been given with appointment but the petitioner's case was not considered.
5. Mrs.G.Hema, the learned Senior Counsel for the respondents, submitted that the minimum cut off marks for the MBC/BC (G) category 2/4
is 268.50 marks but the petitioner had obtained only 264 marks; hence he did not come under the zone of consideration.
6. However, the petitioner claims that she has got PSTM (Persons Studied in Tamil Medium) certificate and if the same is considered he will come under the zone of consideration for the marks obtained by him.
7. Since the petitioner's representation has not been considered, the respondents are directed to consider the same and pass orders on merits, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed. No costs. 15.03.2024 Index : Yes/No Speaking order: Yes/No bkn 3/4
R.N.MANJULA, J., bkn To The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Chennai - 600 003.
Writ Petition No.1674 of 2021 15.03.2024 4/4