P. Gandhi v. The Chairman

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 09.11.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR W.P.NO.24315 OF 2009 P.Gandhi No.47 Ranjini Priya Nagar, Near Modern Matric School, Semmandalam, Cuddalore.

... Petitioner .Vs.

The Chairman Teachers Recruitment Board, Chennai.

... Respondent PRAYER:- The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for writ of Certiorari Mandamus, calling for all the records relating to this recruitment of Block Resource Teacher Educators for Government Block Resource Centres 2007-2008 and quash the same in respect of candidates who have obtained 121 marks in History in general and most backward classes in so far as the same contrary to the norms in the case of tie and direct the respondent to select the petitioner for the post of Project Co-coordinators and Block Resource Teacher Educators. For Petitioner :

Mr.K.Sakthivel For Respondent :

Mr.C.Kathiravan Government Advocate

O R D E R

As seen from the records, the writ petitioner was aged about 49 years at the time of filing the writ petition in the year 2009 and the petitioner has challenged the recruitment to the post of Block Resource Teacher Educator for Government Block Resource Centres 2007-2008. According to the petitioner, the candidates who have secured altogether 121 marks were selected https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

without considering the instructions given in the notification. The petitioner has secured 121 marks, but was not called for, for certificate verification. Therefore, the petitioner has challenged the recruitment to the post of Block Resource Teacher Educator for Government Block Resource Centres 2007-2008 under MBC quota.

2. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent wherein it has been stated that last person called for Certificate Verification under MBC (GT) has secured '119' marks whereas the petitioner has secured only '114' marks. The last person called for Certificate Verification under MBC (W) has secured '115' marks and therefore, the petitioner was not selected for the aforesaid post. The another ground raised by the petitioner in the affidavit is that weightage was not considered by the respondent. The respondent has stated in the counter affidavit that weight age marks will be allocated by the Board after producing the registration in employment exchange and teaching experience. Therefore, both grounds raised by the petitioner is unfounded and the same are liable to be rejected.

3. In view of the statement made in the counter affidavit that the last person under MBC (General Turn) has secured '119' marks whereas the petitioner has secured only '114' marks, there is no illegality in the process of recruitment to the post of Block Resource Teacher Educator and consequently, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

4. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. No Costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS II) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar vaan To The Chairman Teachers Recruitment Board, Chennai.

W.P.NO.24315 OF 2009 SR(CO) PBS/22/11/2021 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/