K.Prathap v. The Chairman, Tangedco Ltd.,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 15.02.2018 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P(MD)Nos.4657 and 4658 of 2014 and MP(MD)Nos.2 and 2 of 2014 K.Prathap ... Petitioner in W.P(MD)No.4657/2014 S.Lakshmi ... Petitioner in W.P(MD)No.4658/2014 Vs.

1. The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., Chennai.

2. The Chief Engineer/Personnel, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., Chennai - 2.

3. The Chief Engineer/Distribution, Madurai Region, TANGEDCO. K.Pudur, Madurai.

4. V.Balasubramaniam

5. S.Mathiyarasi

6. T.Praveen Kumar

7. K.Lakshmi Deepa

8. S.Ananthi

9. S.Sharmila Devi 10.G.Uma Maheswari ... Respondents in both petitions Prayer : Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned selection list of 182 Assistant Engineers for EEE by direct recruitment for the year 2013-2014 published on 24.02.2014 and quash the same so far as the respondents 4 to 10 are concerned and direct the respondent 1 to 3 to include the petitioners' name in the selection list of 182 Assistant Engineers for EEE by direct recruitment for the years 2013-2014 published on 24.02.2014 with effect from the date on which the other selected candidates were allowed to join the department granting such other and further relief as this Court deems fir and proper in the circumstances of this case.

In both cases For Petitioners : Mr.B.N.Raja Mohamed For Respondents : Mr.G.Kasinathadurai for RR1 to 3 Mr.S.C.Herold Singh for RR4, 6 to 10 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

COMMON ORDER The petitioners in these writ petitions were candidates for the post of A.E.(EEE) in the recruitment process conducted by TANGEDCO for the year 2013-14. The candidates sponsored by the Employment Exchange and Ex-Apprentices of TNEB were called for interview. The selection was to be finalised based on the marks secured by the candidates in the qualifying examination and in the viva voce in the following manner.

i) Marks obtained in the BE/AMIE examination to be worked out for:- 85% ii)For viva-voce interview in Technical subjects and Managerial skills:- 15% 2.The petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.4657 of 2014 is an exapprentice of TNEB. Though he belongs to SC community, he came under the non priority quota. The cut off marks in his category was 74.12. But the petitioner secured only 65.71 marks. Therefore, he did not reach the zone of consideration. The petitioner in W.P.(MD) No.4658 of 2014 was sponsored by the employment exchange under the priority category. She also belonged to SC community. The cut off mark in her case was 62.37. But, she has secured only 61.63. She also did not reach the zone of selection.

3.Since in both the cases, the respective petitioners' marks are below the cut off marks prescribed for the respective category, they could not be selected. The petitioners have not placed any material to substantiate their contention that they were awarded low marks in the interview. Therefore, there is no merit in the writ petition.

4.Both the writ petition stand dismissed. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are also dismissed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (T&P) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar + 1 CC TO Mr.S.C.HEROLD SINGH, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 48969 ARUL TE/SV-MMS/SAR-3 : 11/06/2018 : 2P/2C W.P(MD)Nos.4657 and 4658 of 2014 and MP(MD)Nos.2 and 2 of 2014 15.02.2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/