C.Dineshkumar v. Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 30.06.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN and W.M.P.Nos.24361 and 24362 of 2025 C.Dineshkumar ... Petitioner Vs.
Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Rep by its Secretary, TNPSC Road, Park Town, Chennai - 600 043.
... Respondent Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the respondent herein in the proceedings No.NIL dated 15.05.2025 (published in Commission's website) pertaining to the list of candidates provisionally selected for the appointment by direct recruitment to the post included in Combined Civil Services Examination (Group-I services) (Notification No.04/2024) in so far as it withholds the petitioner's name for appointment to the post of Assistant Director of Rural Development and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to sponsor the petitioner name for appointment to the post of Assistant Director of Rural Development in light of judgment passed by this Court in Writ Appeal 1/7
No.2164 of 2024 dated 29.10.2024 and W.P.No.4210 of 2024 dated 20.02.2024.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Syed Mustafa For Respondents : Mr.I.Abrar Mohammed Abdullah Standing Counsel
O R D E R
The instant writ petition has been filed with a prayer for issuing a Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the respondent herein in the proceedings No.NIL dated 15.05.2025 (published in Commission's website) pertaining to the list of candidates provisionally selected for the appointment by direct recruitment to the post included in Combined Civil Services Examination (Group-I services) (Notification No.04/2024) in so far as it withholds the petitioner's name for appointment to the post of Assistant Director of Rural Development and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to sponsor the petitioner name for appointment to the post of Assistant Director of Rural Development in light of judgment passed by this Court in Writ Appeal No.2164 of 2024 dated 29.10.2024 and W.P.No.4210 of 2024 dated 20.02.2024.
2/7
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was selected for Group-II Services for the post of Sub Registrar, Grade-II, wherein also a similar issue was raised in respect of the petitioner's PSTM certificate. Ultimately, the matter was decided by this Court in W.A.No.2164 of 2024 to the effect that the petitioner possesses a valid PSTM certificate. Against the said order, the Commission preferred an Appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP.No.9599 of 2025, which is pending.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that even in the present recruitment, the respondent has challenged the PSTM certificate, which was already settled in W.A.No.2164 of 2024, by referring to the pendency of the SLP.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner also invites the attention of this Court to the fact that the Commission has issued a provisional appointment order subject to the outcome of SLP.No.9599 of 2025, which is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, and hence seeks a direction to 3/7
the Commission to issue a similar provisional order for the Group-I appointment.
5. Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent strongly objects to the contentions and submits that by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.16 Human Resources Management Department, dated 15.04.2025, candidates who have completed the required qualification through private study are not eligible for appointment under the PSTM quota. It is further submitted that the SLP was filed in a connected matter and therefore, no appointment order can be issued subject to the outcome of the SLP.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.
7. Though SLP.No.9599 of 2025 arises out of another recruitment, the issue involved in the said SLP pertains to the validity of the PSTM certificate of the petitioner. Such certificate was upheld by this Court in W.A.No.2164 of 2024, and there is no stay granted in the SLP. 4/7
8. At this juncture, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent fairly submits that, in respect of other candidates, appointment orders have already been issued, and they are presently undergoing training. Therefore, in order to avoid any future complications regarding the seniority of the petitioner and to ensure effective training along with his peers, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the Commission to issue an appointment order.
9. In the result, the Commission is directed to issue an appointment order to the petitioner with a reference that the above appointment order is issued, subject to the outcome of SLP.No.9599 of 2025, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
10. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
30.06.2025 jas Index : Yes/No Speaking order /Non Speaking Order 5/7
To The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, TNPSC Road, Park Town, Chennai - 600 043 6/7
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
jas and W.M.P.Nos.24361 and 24362 of 2025 30.06.2025 7/7