R.Mahalakshmi v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 29.11.2022 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM 1.R.Mahalakshmi 2.J.Sridhar 3.S.Sahish Kumar 4.K.K.Vasanthi 5.S.Suresh 6.C.S.Vinoth Kumar ... Petitioners Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Chief Secretary Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Secretary, Department of School Education, Government of Tamil Nadu, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
3.The Chairman, Teachers Recruitment Board, College Road, Chennai - 600 006.
... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the eligibility of 50% for appointment, by adding 20 marks to the 20 wrong questions framed in the special examination held on 24.01.2010
which were confirmed to be wrong, ambiguous, out of syllabus and consequently appoint the petitioners to the post of Computer Instructors. For Petitioners : Mr.Raj Kumar For R1 : Mr.R.P.Murugan Raja Government Advocate For R2 : Mr.S.Yahwanth Additional Government Pleader For R3 : C.Kathiravan Special Government Pleader [TRB]
O R D E R
The writ petition is filed to direct the respondents to consider the eligibility of 50% for appointment, by adding 20 marks to the 20 wrong questions framed in the special examination held on 24.01.2010 which were confirmed to be wrong, ambiguous, out of syllabus and consequently appoint the petitioners to the post of Computer Instructors.
2. The petitioners have participated in the process of selection for appointment to the post of Computer Teacher. Admittedly, the petitioners have not secured eligible marks of 65 marks and the cut-off mark fixed was 65 marks. In respect of certain questions, the petitioners raised objections regarding its correctness.
3. In this regard, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the 3rd respondent brought to the notice of this Court that similar doubts were raised during the relevant point of time by the candidates and the matter was considered by this Court in W.P.No.7567 of 2010 filed by the Higher Secondary School Computer Teachers Association. The matter went up to the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.No.837 of 2010 and pursuant to the directions of this Court, the disputed key answers were verified through the experts from the Indian Institute of Technology.
4. Pursuant to the directions of the High Court, a team of experts in the Indian Institute of Technology verified the correctness of the questions and the key answers and as per their suggestions, 20 questions were deleted by the 1st respondent / Board and the revised selection list was published during the relevant point of time in the year 2013. The selection was concluded more than 8 years back and the disputed questions and key answers were also verified by the team of exports from Indian Institute of Technology and based on the report, revised selection list was published and accordingly, the selected candidates were
appointed. Even in the revised selection list, the names of the petitioners were not found as they were not within the zone of consideration.
5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. 29.11.2022 Jeni Index : Yes Speaking order : Yes To 1.The Chief Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Secretary, Department of School Education, Government of Tamil Nadu, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
3.The Chairman, Teachers Recruitment Board, College Road, Chennai - 600 006.
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Jeni 29.11.2022