D. Silambarasi, v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 05.07.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.(MD)Nos.13777 of 2014 and M.P.(MD)No. 1 of 2014 D.Silambarasi ... Petitioner -Vs1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of School Education, Fort St. George, Chennai- 9.
2.The Chairman, Teachers Recruitment Board, 4th Floor, E.V.K.Sampath Building, D.P.I.Complex, College Road, Chennai - 6.
...Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to include the petitioner's name ''Silambarasi" and her roll number 13TE17201324 in the provisional list of Tamil Nadu Teachers Eligibility Test - 2012, 2013 Special TNTET-2014 dated 10.08.2014 and may consequently direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's name for the post of B.T.Assistants physics major in par with other eligible candidates under the Tamil Nadu School Educational Subordinate Services.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.P.Narayanakumar For Respondents : Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan Special Government Pleader
O R D E R
The relief sought for in this writ petition is for a direction to direct the second respondent to include the petitioner's name 'Silambarasi'.
2. The grievance of the writ petitioner is that her name was not considered for appointment to the Post of P.G.Assistant in PSTM category. The petitioner claims that she studied in Tamil
Medium. Therefore, the benefit of PSTM quota is to be provided.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the writ petitioner is entitled to get appointment as P.G Assistant under PSTM category. The writ petitioner further states that though she is entitled to get an appointment as per the marks obtained by the petitioner in the selection, the respondents had not considered her name under PSTM category. Thus, the petitioner has moved the present writ petition.
4. The learned counsel for the respondent opposed the contention by stating that the writ petitioner cannot be considered under PSTM category. In this regard, the learned counsel for the respondent solicited the attention of this Court with reference to the application form filled up by the writ petitioner which is annexed in page No. 8 of the typed set of papers in the present writ petition.
5. In the application submitted by the petitioner it is mentioned that the petitioner has studied SSLC, Higher Secondary as well as B.Ed in Tamil Medium. However, under graduation degree was studied in English Medium. When the writ petitioner studied under graduation degree in English Medium, she is not entitled to avail the benefit of PSTM category. The requisite qualification for getting the benefit of the quota is that the candidates should have been studied only through Tamil Medium.
6. In the present case, based on the application submitted by the writ petitioner, she had undergone degree course in English Medium and therefore, she is not entitled for the benefit of PSTM category for appointment to the post of P.G. Assistant. Thus, the rejection of the application of the writ petitioner under PSTM category is in consonance with the Rules in force. However, the case of the petitioner was considered along with General category. Thus, there is no infirmity. Hence, the writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AE) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) To, 1.The Principal Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu, Department of School Education, Fort St. George,Chennai- 9.
2.The Chairman,Teachers Recruitment Board, 4th Floor, E.V.K.Sampath Building,D.P.I.Complex, College Road,Chennai - 6.
+1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-73971[F] dated 08/07/2019 ) +1 CC to M/s.K.P.NARAYANA KUMAR, Advocate ( SR-74184[F] dated 09/07/2019 ) cm W.P.(MD)Nos.13777 of 2014 and M.P.(MD)No. 1 of 2014 05.07.2019 KM/(22.07.2019) 3P 5C