Ms.R. Shanmuga Priya, v. The Secretary,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:05.07.2019

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.(MD) No.11995 of 2014 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2014 R.Shanmuga Priya ... Petitioner -vsThe Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Chennai.

... Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to permit the petitioner for the oral test and to consider her appointment for the post of Executive Officer Grade I, Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department in Group VII A Service.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Madhavan For Respondent : Mr.K.K.Senthil

O R D E R

The relief sought for in the present writ petition is for a direction to direct the respondent to permit the writ petitioner to consider her for the post of Executive Officer Grade-I, Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Charitable and Endowments Department, in Group-VII A Service.

2.The claim of the writ petitioner is that her case is to be considered under PSTM quota for appointment to the post of Executive Officer Grade-I.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner states that the writ petitioner has studied in Tamil medium and therefore, she is entitled to avail the quota now announced by the Government of Tamil Nadu for the Persons Studied in Tamil medium. This Court is of the considered opinion that the recruitment, which is under question in the present writ petition was of the year 2013-14. 4.The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission made a submission that the writ petitioner had not opted for PSTM category and therefore, she was not considered under the PSTM category. A candidate, who had opted for PSTM category alone is eligible to be considered for the purpose of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

selection and appointment. When the writ petitioner herself had not opted for the PSTM quota, the respondent has rightly considered her name under the general category and there is no infirmity as sought. The learned counsel for the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission states that the writ petitioner secured 307.50, the cut off marks for the test is 376.70. Therefore, the writ petitioner was not within the zone of consideration, even comparatively the writ petitioner secured lesser mark and therefore, the writ petitioner is not entitled to get any relief as sought for in the present writ petition.

5.With the above observation, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) To The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Chennai.

+1 cc Mr.M.KARTHIKEYA VENKATACHALAPATHY,Advocate, SR.No. 73628 +1 cc Mr.K.K.SENTHIL ,Advocate, SR.No. 74033 W.P.(MD) No.11995 of 2014 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2014 05.07.2019 SJI/NS KK/SAR/25.07.2019/2P-4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/