K.Niranjanadevi v. The Secretary
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.04.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA W.P.(MD) No.9883 of 2024 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.8961 & 8963 of 2024 K.Niranjanadevi ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Secretary Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Park Town, Chennai.
2.The Controller of Examination Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Park Town, Chennai.
... Respondents 1/9
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent, dated 08.04.2024 pursuant to the combined Civil Service Examination -II (Interview Posts / Non Interview Posts) Group-II Services / Group-II A services TNPSC in respect of result of the petitioner in her Reg No.1004027214 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents to call the petitioner for certificate verification for further course of selection process by furnishing the mark of the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Gokulraj For Respondents : Mr.T.Amjadkhan - for R2 Government Advocate Mr.V.Paneerselvam - for R1 Standing Counsel 2/9
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent, dated 08.04.2024 pursuant to the Combined Civil Service Examination -II (Interview Posts/Non Interview Posts) Group-II Services/Group-IIA services TNPSC in respect of result of the petitioner in her Reg No.1004027214 and quash the same as illegal and consequently, direct the respondents to call the petitioner for certificate verification for further course of selection process by furnishing the mark of the petitioner.
2. Heard Mr.S.Gokulraj, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.V.Paneerselvam, learned counsel for the first respondent and Mr.T.Amjadkhan, learned Government Advocate for the second respondent.
3/9
3. By consent of both parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has applied under PSTM category for the exam of Combined Civil Service Examination-II (Interview Posts/Non Interview Posts) Group-II Services/Group-II A services and she has reached the zone of consideration and she has uploaded the certificate, despite she was not called upon for certificate verification. The petitioner came to understand on enquiry that she did not submit the PSTM certificate in the prescribed format and as required by TNPSC.
5. The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner had studied upto 12th Standard only in Tamil medium and she has produced the relevant certificate issued by the Headmaster of the school for the 10th Standard and for the 12th Standard the certificate given by Deputy Director of Controller of Examination. 4/9
6. However, the learned Standing Counsel submitted that the petitioner had not produced the certificate in respect of 12th Standard stating that the petitioner had studied 12th Standard also in Tamil medium, but the certificate only conveys that the petitioner had written the examination in Tamil medium. Since the petitioner happened to appear for 12th Standard through private mode, she was under compulsive circumstances to obtain the certificate not from the school authorities but from the Deputy Director of Controller of Examination. In such case, it is impractical to expect from similar such candidates to get a certificate similar to the form in which the school authorities might give for those regular students.
7. So far as the Deputy Director of Controller of Examination is concerned, he would only know from the examination written by the petitioner that she had written the examination in Tamil. Only the school authorities can give certificate as to whether a candidate has studied the course also in 5/9
Tamil medium. For all those candidates who studied in private study either by joining a tutorial or by being at home, the knowledge that the candidate had studied the course in Tamil medium can be only with the persons closely associated to them during their studies i.e., with the family members or the tutorial teachers. So, in such case, the second respondent cannot expect the Deputy Director of Controller of Examination to issue a certificate stating that the petitioner has studied the course in Tamil medium.
8. It goes without saying that a person who had studied and given his examination in Tamil until 10th Standard could not have studied the 12th Standard course in English medium and written the examination alone in Tamil medium. Only because the petitioner is conversant and comfortable in Tamil medium, she has chosen to write the examination in Tamil medium and there need not be any doubt that the petitioner have studied the 12th Standard also in Tamil medium.
6/9
9. Since the pedantic approach had deprived the petitioner from participating in certificate verification, the impugned order, dated 08.04.2024 passed by the second respondent is set aside. The first respondent is directed to permit the petitioner for certificate verification on par with similar such eligible candidates and proceed to the next level of selection.
10. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is Allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
23.04.2024 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No RM Note : Issue Order copy on 25.04.2024 7/9
To 1.The Secretary Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Park Town, Chennai.
2.The Controller of Examination Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Park Town, Chennai.
8/9
R.N.MANJULA , J.
RM Order made in W.P.(MD)No.9883 of 2024 23.04.2024 9/9