N.Devika v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 02.02.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN W.P.No.14623 of 2023 and WMP.Nos.14105 & 14109 of 2023 N.Devika ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The State of Tamilnadu, Rep by the Principal Secretary to Government, Department of School Education, Secretariat, Chennai 600 009 2.The Commissioner/Director, School Education Department, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006 3.The Teachers Recruitment Board, Rep. By its Member Secretary, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006 ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 3rd Respondent to award three marks to the petitioner based on petitioner's representations dated 30.03.2023 & 19.04.2023 for the post of teacher as per the notification of the third respondent dated 07.03.2022 in Advertisement No.1 of 2021 and consequently direct the respondents to appoint this petitioner as teacher in the School Education Department forthwith. 1/6
For Petitioner : Mr.C.Uma Shankar for Mr.A.M.Amutha Ganesh For Respondents For R3 : Mr.R.Neelakandan, Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.C.Kathiravan, Standing Counsel For R1 & 2 : Dr.T.Seenivasan, Special Government Pleader
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed for direction to the third respondent to award three marks for the petitioner based on her representations dated 30.03.2023 and 19.04.2023 in the Teachers Eligibility Test, 2022.
2.
The petitioner was qualified with B.A., B.Ed. as per the notification issued by the third respondent dated 07.03.2022 for Tamilnadu Teacher Eligibility Test, 2022 in advertisement No.1 of 2022. The petitioner had applied for and had attended written examination for paper-II for classes VI to VIII. After issuance of answer key, the 2/6
petitioner had challenged the key answers insofar as question Nos.47, 54 & 55. However, the objections were not considered and published the result. She had secured 81 out of 150. If the objections raised by the petitioner were considered, she would have been awarded three marks more. Therefore, she would be qualified in the Teacher Eligibility test. 3.
The second respondent filed counter and Mr.R.Neelakandan, the learned Additional Advocate General submitted that after examination, the answer key was released in the website for calling for submission of objections. Thereafter, the Board received over all 16,409 objections for 1346 questions from 3,341 candidates, out of which the objections insofar as 266 questions were accepted and obejctions for the remaining 1080 questions were rejected by the Expert Committee. After thorough scrutiny of the said experts, final key was arrived and on the basis of which the computer based examination for Teacher Eligibility Test Paper-II was evaluated. The revised and final answer key arrived by the experts was published along with the results on 28.03.2023 in the Board's official website. After release of final key answer, till April 3/6
2023, the Board received around 84 objections pertaining to the said final key answers. Objections for 28 questions along with 84 questions were scrutinised by re-inviting the subject experts. After disputed questions were taken up for scrutiny by the expert committee and final decisions have been arrived at the Board meeting of the Teachers Recruitment Board. Accordingly, the Board published revised results on the official website of Teachers Recruitment Board on 27.07.2023. As per the Board decision, re-verification was done for all sessions, all questions including the representations and objections received from the candidates. Based on the subject experts re-verification report, change of key answers was recommended for 15 questions in eleven sessions. The objections raised by the petitioner to the question Nos.47, 54, 55 were considered and rejected.
4.
Therefore, the representation submitted by the petitioner cannot be considered and this writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner may be served with the opinion of the expert 4/6
committee insofar as the objections raised by the petitioner with regards to question Nos.47, 54 and 55. Considering the same, the third respondent is directed to serve a copy of expert opinion in respect of objections for the question Nos.47, 54 and 55 to the petitioner without mentioning the name of the experts, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
5.
With the above direction, this writ petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
02.02.2024 Internet: Yes Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order lok 5/6
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
lok To 1.The Principal Secretary to Government, State of Tamilnadu, Department of School Education, Secretariat, Chennai 600 009 2.The Commissioner/Director, School Education Department, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006 3.Member Secretary, The Teachers Recruitment Board, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006 02.02.2024 6/6