R.Hariram, v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated :: 31.07.2015

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN W.P.No.23044 of 2015 R.Hariram

...Petitioner

Vs 1 State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Home Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-9.

2 The Director General of Police, Chennai - 600 004.

3. The Chairman Tamilnadu Uniformed Services, Recruitment Board, No.807, Anna Salai, 2nd Floor, Chennai - 600 002.

...Respondents

Writ Petition filed under Art.226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarfied Mandamus, challenging the online Proceedings of the 3rd respondent in declaring the petitioner with Registration No.614773 as not qualified for the next stage in the direct recruitment of Sub Inspector of Police by applying the cut off mark under Department quota under Community BC (General) and quash the same and thereby issue a direction to the respondents to apply the cut off mark under Ward Quota BC (General) and declare the petitioner as qualified for the next stage of Certificate Verification in the direct recruitment of Sub Inspector of Police conducted vide Notification No.1/2015 dated 8.2.2015 For Petitioner : Dr.R.Gouri For Respondents : Mr.PH.AravindPandian Addl.Advocate General Assisted by Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan Special Govt.Pleader

O R D E R

The petitioner applied for the post of Sub Inspector of Police, pursuant to notification, dated 08.02.2015. He participated https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

in the written examination conducted on 24.05.2015. The petitioner belongs to BC category. He secured 48.5 marks.

2. It is the grievance of the petitioner that since he applied under Wards Quota, the respondent ought to have applied the cut off marks for BC General under Police Ward quota i.e, 44 and not under BC General category under Department quota, for which the cut off marks is 60.50. Hence, the petitioner has come up with this writ petition.

3. Heard both sides.

4. As rightly contended by the learned Additional Advocate General, the petitioner is serving as Police personnel and he obtained the said employment under Ward Quota. Therefore, he cannot again seek appointment to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police under Ward quota. Admittedly, the petitioner scored only 48.5 marks as against 60.50 marks, meant for BC General under Department Quota.

5. In view of the above, there is no merit in the writ petition. The writ petition fails and accordingly, the same is dismissed. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar True Copy Sub Assistant Registrar To

1. The Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu Home Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-9.

2 The Director General of Police, Chennai - 600 004.

3. The Chairman Tamilnadu Uniformed Services, Recruitment Board, No.807, Anna Salai, 2nd Floor, Chennai - 600 002.

W.P.No.23044 of 2015 km(co) pmk.18.8.2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/