J.Prabu v. M/S. Central University Of Tamil Nadu,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 21.04.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA and W.M.P. No. 39838 of 2018 J.Prabu ... Petitioner -vs1. M/s. Central University of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Registrar, Neelakudi Campus, Thiruvarur - 610 101.

2. SR Sony

3. Ponraj S ... Respondents Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to cancel the recruitment made pursuant to the Notification No.CUTN/NT/01/2016 dated 07.06.2016 and to re-conduct the selection process and call for the petitioner for the demo/skill driving test upon considering the Petitioner's representation dated 01.09.2018. For Petitioner : Mr.Swarnam J. Rajagopalan For Respondents : Mr.V.Rajasekar (for R1) Mr.A.Bharath Kumar for M/s. R.Deepan (for R3) No appearance (for R2) 1/5

O R D E R

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking writ of mandamus, directing the first respondent to cancel the recruitment made pursuant to the Notification No.CUTN/NT/01/2016 dated 07.06.2016 and to re-conduct the selection process and call for the petitioner for the demo/skill driving test upon considering the Petitioner's representation dated 01.09.2018. 2.

Heard Mr.Swarnam J. Rajagopalan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.V.Rajasekar, learned counsel for the first respondent and Mr.A.Bharath Kumar for M/s. R.Deepan, learned counsel for the third respondent and perused the materials placed on record, apart from the pleadings of the parties. 3.

The petitioner was working as a Driver on contractual basis with the respondent University from 26.12.2012 till 2019. The respondent had called for applications for the post of Semi Professional Assistant (Library), Upper Division Clerk (UDC), Library Assistant and Driver, vide Notification dated 07.06.2016. The petitioner applied to the post of Driver and participated in the written test. Persons, who have secured more than 33% marks in the written test, are qualified to participate in the skill driving test. The petitioner had 2/5

secured 71 marks and got third rank in the written test. The second and third respondents have secured 85 and 74 marks respectively and got first and second ranks respectively in the written test. However, the second and third respondents were allowed to participate in the skill test but the third respondent was not allowed to participate in the skill test. Without allowing the petitioner also to prove his skill test, the selection process was completed by selecting the second and third respondents alone to the post. Having aggrieved due to the denial to participate in the skill driving test, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking writ of mandamus.

4.

The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that as the second and third respondent have secured more marks in the written examination, those two were allowed to participate in the skill test and based upon their performance, they have been selected.

5.

Even according to the first respondent University, the petitioner was not allowed to participate in the skill test. When the selection list is drawn based upon the performance both in the written test and the skill test, it is unfair on the part of the first respondent University to cut-short the selection process by allowing the second and third respondents to participate in the skill test. 3/5

However, it is now learnt that the second respondent has left the post and one post is still vacant. In such case, it will be appropriate to allow the petitioner to prove his driving skill by participating in the skill test conducted by the first respondent University. That will help the first respondent University as well as the petitioner to resolve the issue that has arisen in this writ petition. 6.

With the above observations, this writ petition is disposed. The first respondent is directed to conduct a skill test to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the petitioner may be considered for selection in the vacant post, if he is found to be eligible in the skill test to be conducted. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

21.04.2025 Internet: Yes/No Speaking /Non-speaking order Neutral Case Citation: Yes/No Maya To The Registrar, Central University of Tamil Nadu, Neelakudi Campus, Thiruvarur - 610 101.

4/5

R.N.MANJULA, J.

Maya Dated : 21.04.2025 5/5