Rajalakshmi v. The State Of Tamilnadu
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED :06.08.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN S.Rajalakshmi ... Petitioner Vs.
1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By its Principal Secretary to Government, Rural Development and Panchayatraj Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Rep. by its Secretary, TNPSC Road, Park Town, Chennai - 600 003.
... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents particularly in the second respondent to consider the petitioner's required qualification by including the I.T.I. Draughtsmenship in Civil for the post of Road Inspector and release the results and consequently give an opportunity to the petitioner for an appointment of post of Road Inspector. 1/7
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Thanjan For Respondents : Mr.N.Naveen Kumar, Government Advocate (for R1) Mr.P.J.Rishikesh, Standing Counsel (for R2) *****
O R D E R
The instant writ petition has been filed with a prayer for issuing a mandamus directing the second respondent to consider the petitioner's required qualification by including the I.T.I. Draughtsmanship in Civil for the post of Road Inspector, and to release the results, and consequently, give an opportunity to the petitioner for appointment to the post of Road Inspector.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner completed her ITI at the Government Industrial Training Institute (Women), Salem, and obtained a certificate in January 2016, having trained at the said institute from August 2013 to July 2015. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that while applying for the post of Road Inspector based on the notification dated 13.01.2023, instead of referring to the ITI certificate, she enclosed her higher qualification of Diploma. However, the said qualification was not accepted by the second respondent 2/7
on the ground that the higher qualification of diploma is not eligible, as per the order in W.P.(MD) No. 6962 of 2023, vide order dated 28.04.2023, and such order was subsequently upheld in W.A.(MD) No. 2039 of 2023, etc., batch, dated 13.08.2024. He would further submit that on 07.08.2025, the second respondent is conducting counselling, whereas the petitioner, having the required qualification, if not permitted to participate in the counselling, would jeopardize her interest. Therefore, the present writ petition has been filed.
3. At this juncture, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the second respondent would submit that at the time of applying for the post, the petitioner had only given a diploma certificate, whereas the required qualification is only ITI. It is the further submission of the learned Standing Counsel that direct diploma course without having any ITI is not a proper qualification, and such stand of the second respondent was confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD) No. 2039 of 2023, etc., batch. Hence, prayed to dismiss the present writ petition.
4. I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions. 3/7
5. The short fact to be considered is whether the petitioner has the required qualification or not. Admittedly, the petitioner did not upload the ITI certificate, which is an essential qualification for the post of Road Inspector, whereas she uploaded a diploma certificate, which, according to her, is a higher qualification; this is the only reason for the rejection. For ready reference, this Court deems it appropriate to extract the rejection order passed by the second respondent, which reads as follows:- "Register Number 2501003186 NE- Not eligible for this recruitment based on orders dated 01.06.2023 in W.P.(MD) No.6962 of 2023 and orders dated 13.08.2024 in WA.(MD).Nos.2039, 975, 1396, 1447 and 1584 of 2023."
6. Here the petitioner claims to have an ITI certificate dated 12.04.2017, and has submitted a copy of the same along with the typed set of papers, which shows she attended classes at the Government Industrial Training Institute (Women), Salem, between August 2013 and July 2015. As on the notification dated 13.01.2023, she had required qualification, but failed to upload the correct certificate, but uploaded the diploma certificate, as she believed that, it is higher qualification, and the same would put her in higher pedestal.
4/7
7. Now, the fact remains that the petitioner had possessed required ITI certificate on the date of notification. Therefore, in the present facts and circumstances, there is some delay on the part of the petitioner in proving her qualification. In such scenario, having the required qualification, if the petitioner is denied permission to participate in the counselling, it would definitely cause great hardship and loss to the petitioner.
8. In view of the same, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the second respondent to admit the petitioner for counselling, which is to be held on 07.08.2025, if she is otherwise eligible. The learned Standing Counsel is requested to inform the authority concerned to permit the petitioner without awaiting a copy of the order.
9. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
06.08.2025 kv Note: Issue order copy on 07.08.2025.
Index : Yes/No Speaking order /Non Speaking Order 5/7
To
1. The Principal Secretary to Government, The State of Tamil Nadu, Rural Development and Panchayatraj Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Secretary, The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, TNPSC Road, Park Town, Chennai - 600 003.
6/7
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
kv 06.08.2025 7/7