Madras High CourtWP/12946/2016dismissed

E.Indhumathi, v. The Teacher Recruitment

2016-04-11Honourable Mr Justice T.Raja2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 11.04.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T. RAJA W.P.No.12946 of 2016 E.Indhumathi ..

Petitioner Vs

1. The Teacher Recruitment Board, represented by its Chairman, 4th Floor, E.V.K. Sampath Maligai, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006.

2. The Director, School Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006.

... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner for the post of B.T. Assistant (English) based on the marks secured by the petitioner for the selection conducted in the year 2013 (Registration No.13TE52208986) within the time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.D.S. Thirumavalavan For Respondent : Mr.A.Kumar Spl. Govt. Pleader (R1 & R2)

O R D E R

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2.

2. The petitioner B.Indumathy has applied for the post of B.T. Assistant (English) as per the notification issued by the 1st respondent for examination of Teacher Eligibility Test for the year 2013. She has participated in TNTET Exam 2013 and secured 89 marks. Pursuant to which, she was issued with a call letter for certificate verification. In compliance of the said call letter she has also produced all her certificates for verification. After participating in both written examination and certificate verification, she has been waiting with a fond hope that she would https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

be issued with an appointment order for the post of B.T. Assistant. But even after a lapse of two years, she has not received any communication from the respondents. Hence she made a representation to the respondents on 28.2.2016 requesting them to consider her for the post of B.T. Assistant (English) based on the marks secured by her in TET examination. But till date, there was no response from the respondents. Hence the petitioner has come forward with this present writ petition.

3. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, on taking instructions, submitted that the respondents have fixed the cut off marks as 90 for all the candidates. He would further submit that admittedly the petitioner has secured 89 marks, hence, she has not been selected for the post of B.T. Assistant.

4. The above said submission of the learned Special Government Pleader is recorded. Considering the fact that the petitioner has secured only 89 marks as against cut off marks of 90, this Court is of the view that she could not be considered for appointment to the post of B.T. Assistant. Therefore, this Writ Petition fails and hence the same is hereby dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CS VII ) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar msr To

1. The Chairman, Teacher Recruitment Board, 4th Floor, E.V.K. Sampath Maligai, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006.

2. The Director, School Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006.

1 cc to Government Pleader, SR. 22748 1 cc to Mr.D.S. Thirumavalavan, Advocate, Sr. 23063 W.P.No.12946 of 2016 KSJ (CO) kk 1/6 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/