M.Ananthaaj v. Teachers Recruitment Board
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 02-01-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI WP No. 49806 of 2025 & W.M.P.Nos.55685, 55687 and 55692 of 2025 and W.P.No.49815 of 2025 & W.M.P.No.55697 of 2025
1. M.Anantharaj S/o. N. Mani, No.135/1, South Street, Mullai Nagar, Gingee, Villupuram District-604 202.
2. A. Gopalakrishnan S/o. D. Arikrishnan, Vowalkundram, SE. Kunnathur Post, Gingee Taluk, Villupuram District
3. K. Chinnamani S/o. Kasi, Thavalappatty Village, Paithur Post, Attur Taluk, Salem District -636 141
4. V.S. Gugan S/o. R.V. Srinivasan, No.90/32A, Chengalvarayan Street, Ayanavaram, Chennai-600 023
5. V. Dhanalakshmi W/o. D. Jayakumar, Samiyapuram X Road, Pattukonampatti Post, Pappireddipatti Taluk, Dharmapuri District-636 905
6. S. Ramachandran S/o. D. Subramani, 7/105, Gandhiammal Street, Pottireddipatti Post, Senthamangalam Taluk, Namakkal District-637 013 ...
Petitioners in both WPs.
__________Page 1 of 10
Vs Teachers Recruitment Board Represented by its Secretary, 3rd and 4th Floor, Puratchi Thalaivar Dr. MGR Centenary Building, Perasiriyar Anbazhagan Kalvi Valagam, DPI Complex, College Road, Chennai-600 006.
... Respondent in both WPs.
Prayer in W.P.No.49806 of 2025:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Declaration, to declare the evaluation methodology adopted by the respondent in awarding asterisk (*) symbol to 8 questions (Question Nos.39, 40, 95, 97, 99, 149, 167 & 180) and consequently, awarding 8 marks to all candidates irrespective of whether they attempted those questions or not, as stated in the master copy issued by the respondent containing the 180 questions in Part A and Part B in the examination held on 28.09.2025 for the post of Physical Education Director Grade-I and the presence of multiple correct options for 4 questions (Question Nos.46, 76, 122 and 140) as arbitrary, unreasoned, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
Prayer in W.P.No.49815 of 2025:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondent from issuing appointment orders to the candidates for the post of Physical Education Director Grade - I pursuant to Notification No.02/2025 dated 10.07.2025 based on the __________Page 2 of 10
results published on 27.11.2025 for Part B in the examination held on 12.10.2025 and certificate verification and consequently direct the respondent to (i) Re-evaluate all answer sheets by removing the 8 marks awarded for asteriskmarked questions; (ii) Award marks only to candidates who actually attempted and answered the 8 questions with the asterisk (*) symbol correctly; (iii) Prepare a fresh merit list based on such re-evaluation for Part B and pass such further or other orders.
For Petitioners in both WPs. : Mrs.Nalini Chidambaram, Sr. Counsel for Mr.C.Uma For Respondent in both WPs. : Mr.R.Neelakandan Asst. by Mr.C.Kathiravan C O M M O N O R D E R The Writ Petition in W.P.No.49806 of 2025 has been filed to declare the evaluation methodology adopted by the respondent in awarding asterisk (*) symbol to 8 questions (Question Nos.39, 40, 95, 97, 99, 149, 167 & 180) and consequently, awarding 8 marks to all candidates irrespective of whether they attempted those questions or not, as stated in the master copy issued by the respondent containing the 180 questions in Part A and Part B in the examination held on 28.09.2025 for the post of Physical Education Director Grade-I and the presence of multiple correct options for 4 questions (Question Nos.46, 76, 122 __________Page 3 of 10
and 140) as arbitrary, unreasoned, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India and the Writ Petition in W.P.No.49815 of 2025 has been filed to forbear the respondent from issuing appointment orders to the candidates for the post of Physical Education Director Grade - I pursuant to Notification No.02/2025 dated 10.07.2025 based on the results published on 27.11.2025 for Part B in the examination held on 12.10.2025 and certificate verification and consequently to direct the respondent to (i) Re-evaluate all answer sheets by removing the 8 marks awarded for asterisk-marked questions; (ii) Award marks only to candidates who actually attempted and answered the 8 questions with the asterisk (*) symbol correctly; (iii) Prepare a fresh merit list based on such re-evaluation for Part B.
2. Since the parties and the issues involved in both the Writ Petitions are one and the same, they are taken up together for hearing and a common order is passed.
3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:- 3.1. The respondent issued notification dated 10.07.2025 inviting applications for the Post of PG Assistants, including Physical Education Director Grade-I. The petitioners being qualified and eligible candidates submitted their applications and appeared for the Written Examination held on 12.10.2025. The Written Examination consisted of 180 Multiple Choice __________Page 4 of 10
Questions divided into two parts (I) Part A (Tamil Eligibility Test) (30 Questions) and Part B (Subject Knowledge) (31 to 180 Questions). The result of the examination was released by the respondent on 27.10.2025 and the petitioners secured pass marks. Upon release of the question booklet with key answers, the petitioners noticed that 8 questions in Part B were marked with an asterisk (*) symbol, namely, Question Nos.39, 40, 95, 97, 99, 149, 167 and 180, however, for the said 8 questions, correct options were also given. Though the said 8 questions have the correct options among the 4 options, yet the Teachers Recruitment Board arbitrarily has given the symbol asterisk (*). 3.2. The respondent without providing any reason or justification, awarded 8 marks to all the candidates irrespective of the fact whether the candidates attempted those questions or not or the candidates answered those questions correctly or not, which constitutes violation of Articles 14 to 16 of the Constitution of India and the principles laid down in respondent's own notification. Hence these petitions.
4. The learned Senior counsel for the petitioners submitted that by awarding 8 marks to all the candidates irrespective of the fact whether the candidates attempted those questions or not or the candidates answered those questions correctly or not, the respondent has committed the following violations:- __________Page 5 of 10
(i) Violation of Articles 14 to 16 of the Constitution of India; (ii) Violation of Principle of reasonable classification; (iii) Violation of Principles of natural justice; (iv) Violation of Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation; (v) Examination vitiated due to fundamental defects; (vi) Arbitrariness in Selection Process;
(vii) Lack of merit;
(viii) Unreasonableness and proportionality;
(ix) Violation of Principles laid down in respondent's own notification and thereby pleaded to allow the present Writ Petitions.
5. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent contended that the respondent Board themselves have admitted that eight questions are wrongly framed and hence, they have awarded marks for those questions to all the candidates irrespective of the fact whether the candidates had attended the questions or not. He further submitted that such an approach of awarding marks for the wrong questions to all the candidates by the respondent Board, cannot be termed as irrational. Hence, he prayed this Court to dismiss the Writ Petitions.
6. I have considered the submissions made by the respective learned counsels and also perused the materials available on record. __________Page 6 of 10
7. On perusal of the records, it is seen that the respondent Board issued notification dated 10.07.2025 for appointment to the post of Physical Education Director Grade-I among other posts, which consists of Tamil Eligibility Test in Part A (30 questions) and Main subject test in Part B (150 questions) and thereafter, examination was conducted and results were announced. When the respondent released the master copy of the answer key for 180 questions, it came to light that 8 questions were framed wrongly which was admitted by them and awarded marks for those wrong questions to all the candidates irrespective of the fact whether they have attended those questions or not, which approach cannot be termed as irrational but only rational. In view of the same, this Court is not inclined to grant the relief sought for by the petitioners in the present Writ Petitions.
8. In the result, the Writ Petitions stand dismissed. Consequently, connected WMP Nos.55685 and 55697 of 2025 are ordered and WMP Nos.55687 and 55692 of 2025 are closed. There shall be no order as to costs. 02.01.2026 Index: Yes/No;
Speaking/Non-speaking order DP __________Page 7 of 10
To Teachers Recruitment Board Represented by its Secretary, 3rd and 4th Floor, Puratchi Thalaivar Dr. MGR Centenary Building, Perasiriyar Anbazhagan Kalvi Valagam, DPI Complex, College Road, Chennai-600 006.
__________Page 8 of 10
M.DHANDAPANI, J.
DP WP Nos.49806 & 49815 of 2025 02.01.2026 __________Page 9 of 10
__________Page 10 of 10