Veera Thilagam.A v. The Chairman

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 24.11.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR A.Veera Thilagam ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Chairman, 2.The Member Secretary, 3.The Commissioner of School Education, 1/6

4.The Director of Technical Education, ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to carry out the necessary corrections in the petitioner's marks obtained in exam, dated 03.02.2023 and consecutively direct the respondents to issue a qualified certificate in paper - II of Tamil Nadu Teachers Eligibility Test, dated 03.02.2023.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.M.Ramasiva For Respondents : Mr.Veera. Kathiravan Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.VR.Shanmuganathan Standing Counsel

ORDER

The present writ petition has been filed seeking a Mandamus as against the respondents to carry out necessary corrections in the petitioner's mark statement and consequently direct the respondents to issue a qualified certificate in paper - II of the Tamil Nadu Teachers Eligibility Test. 2/6

2. According to the learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, she had appeared for the TNTET examination on 03.02.2023. Tentative key answers were published on 21.02.2023. She had lodged her objections to the tentative key answers and ultimately final key answers were published on 28.03.2023. According to the petitioner, as per final key answers, the petitioner could have secured 86 marks. However only 81 marks have been awarded.

3. The learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents herein pointed out that after publication of final key answers, certain objections were considered by the experts and a revised final key was published. Even as per the revised final key answers, the petitioner has secured only 81 marks and therefore, the request of the petitioner cannot be considered.

4. In view of the above said submissions made by the respondents herein, this Court is not in a position to issue a Mandamus directing them to issue a revised mark statement to the writ petitioner. 3/6

5. This writ petition is devoid of merits. Hence, this writ petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. 24.11.2023 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes BTR To 1.The Chairman, 2.The Member Secretary, 3.The Commissioner of School Education, 4/6

4.The Director of Technical Education, 5/6

R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.

BTR 24.11.2023 6/6