Selva Raja Arasan .C v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Reserved on : 31.07.2024 Pronounced on : 12.08.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and W.M.P(MD)Nos.12471 & 12472 of 2023 C.Selva Raja Arasan .... Petitioner Vs.
1.The State represented by The Principal Secretary, Environment and Forests Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, TNPSC Road, Park Town, V.O.C.Nagar, Chennai - 600 003.
3.G.Athilingam 4.A.Meena 5.R.Santhosh 6.Muthumani 1/16
7.K.Deepa 8.S.Suresh Ramanan 9.T.Brindha 10.N.Ajay 11.N.Balasubramani 12.R.Jinoblessil 13.E.Balamurugan 14.G.Ranjith 15.A.Kanimozhi 16.S.Nithya 17.D.Aswini 18.A.Manjuhashini 19.G.Adhiyamaan 20.S.Parthiban 21.T.Shivaji 22.S.Askari 23.S.Kumar 24.M.Sureshkrishnan 25.G.Nirmala 26.S.Ponnammal 27.K.Venish 2/16
28.M.Karthick 29.M.Murugan 30.M.Sayadevi 31.S.Dhivyalakshmi 32.M.Ramprakash 33.P.Sathishkumar 34.S.Shanthini 35.S.Mahendran 36.K.Gokilakannan 37.B.Venkateshwaran 38.T.Arunkumar 39.A.Adhirai 40.S.Tamilarasan 41.M.Ganesh 42.P.Prabakaran 43.R.Mounika 44.T.Sussendranath 45.N.Divya 46.D.Saranya 47.R.Pavithra 48.M.Sathya 3/16
49.R.Thirunirai Selvan 50.U.Kavin 51.G.Muralidharan 52.M.Saidhani 53.K.Karthikeyan 54.R.Gokul 55.D.Krishna Kumar 56.S.Priya 57.T.Pavithra 58.G.Yogeshwaran 59.D.Raja 60.D.Dharmaraja 61.K.Giritharan 62.M.Joseph Stalin 63.R.Deepakkumar 64.P.Anbarasi 65.P.Gomathi 66.M.Jananie 67.M.Indhumathi 68.E.M.Gunaseelan 69.K.Manikandan 4/16
70.C.Suganthan 71.M.Sundaravel 72.M.Prabhu 73.M.Thirumurugan 74.K.Prabaharan 75.P.Ramesh 76.K.Pasupathi 77.S.Selvakumar 78.N.Krishnakumar 79.M.Pradeepa 80.S.Sathamhusainkhan 81.R.Sasee Hari Priya 82.S.Indu 83.S.Subash 84.M.Megala 85.S.Magesh 86.V.Thirumurugan 87.P.Rajasekaran 88.R.Sasikumar 89.T.Sathishkumar 90.S.Johnpeter 5/16
91.M.Thilagavathi 92.E.Sarumathi 93.P.Bhuvanesh 94.R.Ayyanar 95.M.Kayathri 96.M.Sakthivel 97.M.Shanmugam 98.R.Saravanakumar 99.C.Veeramani 100.S.R.Shrigokul 101.A.Shanthinipriya 102.M.Sangareswari @ Nagajothi 103.K.Dineshkumar 104.M.Manoranjitham 105.M.Divakar 106.C.Karventhan 107.C.N.Hari Prasath 108.B.Ashok Kannan 109.M.Satheeshkumar 110.S.Hussain 111.D.Manivenkatesh 6/16
112.S.Sivasankaran 113.M.Selvarani 114.K.Sudhakar 115.M.Sujitha 116.M.Mahendran 117.O.Ranganathan 118.D.Arulkumar 119.S.Myvizhi 120.M.Muralitharan 121.S.Tamilselvan 122.S.Gowsikaa 123.K.Ranjith 124.S.Sakthivel 125.K.Aalayamani 126.M.Yuvarajkumar 127.S.Suresh 128.N.Kanagaraj 129.D.Jansirani 130.N.Lavanya 131.M.Shanthikumari 132.R.Duraibabu 7/16
133.K.Murugan 134.P.Rajaguruvu 135.M.Muniyappan 136.P.Maina 137.K.MDMohideen Abdul Kather Jailani 138.M.Vinobha 139.M.Nithyakalyani 140.M.Poovendhan 141.D.Pavithra 142.M.Prathab 143.M.Prabakaran 144.A.Ravi Perumal 145.B.C.Rumya 146.V.Sowmiya 147.M.Jayalakshmi 148.G.Sandhiya 149.R.Sampath 150.P.Rathiesh 151.J.Naveenkumar 152.G.Dineshkumar 153.M.Suresh 154.B.Palanikumaran 8/16
155.J.Ravi 156.K.Sivananthan 157.A.Bharathidasan 158.M.Balusamy ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records on the file of the second respondent in connection with the impugned final selection list of the respondents 3 to 158 for appointment to the post of Forest Apprentice in the Tamil Nadu Forest Sub-Ordinate Service under Direct Recruitment vide his proceedings in No.NIL, dated NIL and the quash same as illegal, arbitrary and thereby direct him to prepare fresh selection list for appointment to the said posts by strictly following the selection process contemplated in Clause 10 of his own Notification dated 04.07.2018 within the time limit that may be stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu For Respondents : Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh Additional Government Pleader for R.1 Mr.V.Panner Selvam Standing Counsel for R.2 9/16
Mr.M.Maran for R.53, R.56, R.79, R.86, R.132 & R.135 No Appearance for R.4 to R.6, R.9 to R.12, R.14, R.16 to R.18, R.20, R.22, R.23, R.29 to R.33, R.37, R.38, R.40, R.42, R.43, R.45 to R.47, R.49 to R.51, R.55, R.57 to R.63, R.65, R.66, R,73, R.74, R.76, R.81, R.83, R.84, R.87, R.88, R.90 to R.92, R.94, R.96, R.97, R.99, R.100, R.102, R.105, R.107, R.108, R.111, R.111 to R.115, R.121 to R.124, R.126, R.127, R.130, R.133, R.136, R.137, R.139 to R.145, R.147, R.149 to R.151, R.153 & R.156
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the second respondent. 2.The case on hand pertains to recruitment to the post of Forest Apprentice in Tamil Nadu Forest Subordinate Service. Notification dated 04.07.2018 was issued by TNPSC inviting applications from eligible candidates for filing up 148 regular vacancies and 10 Schedules Caste shortfall vacancies. The educational qualification for the post is as follows:
10/16
Name of the post Educational Qualification Preferential Qualification (1) (2) (3) Forest Apprentice (a) Must possess a Bachelor's degree in Forestry or its equivalent degree of any Institution or University recognized by UGC.
Only if suitable candidates with the educational qualification referred to in item (a) in column (2) are not available for selection, candidates with qualification referred to in item(b) will be considered for selection process in the respective communal categories.
OR (b) Must possess a Bachelor's Degree or its equivalent degree in any one of the following subjets from any Institution or University recognized by UGC.
1. Agriculture 2.Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Science
3. Botany
4. Chemistry 5.Computer Applications / Computer Science 6.Engineering(All Engineering subjects including Agricultural Engineering) 7.Environmental Science
8. Geology
9. Horticulture
10. Marine Biology
11. Mathematics
12. Physics
13. Statistics
14. Wildlife biology
15. Zoology 11/16
The candidates were to take part in written test, physical test and oral test. The petitioner successfully cleared the written test as well as the physical test. He was however not called for certificate verification and oral test. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed W.P(MD)No.11149 of 2019. When the writ petition was taken up for disposal on 21.06.2022, it was submitted by the respondents that certificate verification and oral test was completed and the final list of selected candidates was published on 20.08.2019 and the selected individuals have also been issued with appointment orders. The petitioner was given liberty to file a fresh writ petition challenging the final selection list. The petitioner was also mandated to implead the selected candidates individually.
Availing the said liberty, the present writ petition has been filed. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner reiterated all the contentions set out in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. He also filed detailed written notice. He also submitted that at present there are vacancies. On instructions of the petitioner, the petitioner's counsel submitted that the petitioner will be satisfied if he is issued with the order of appointment now and if the seniority and service benefits are reckoned from the date of appointment. He called upon this Court to grant relief by taking note of the aforesaid submission.
12/16
4.The official respondents have filed counter affidavit. It is submitted that selection was made only in consonance with the recruitment rules. It is pointed out that the petitioner is a non-forestry candidate. Since there were sufficient number of candidates having forestry qualification, the petitioner could not make it even though he was more meritorious. It is true that 4 non-forestry candidates who scored marks lower compared to the petitioner were also appointed. But they fell under the differently abled category. The petitioner cannot compare himself to them. The respondents called upon this Court to sustain the selection list and dismiss the writ petition.
5. I carefully considered the rival contentions and went through the materials on record.
6. Column No.3 of Clause 5(B) of the impugned notification reads as follows:
"Only if suitable candidates with the educational qualification referred to in item (a) in column (2) are not available for selection, candidates with qualification referred to in item(b) will be considered for selection process in the respective communal categories."
Of course, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the rule of preference will have to be applied in such a manner so that if two candidates are evenly placed, 13/16
the person having the preferential qualification is selected. Preference, in the context of all such competitive scheme of selection would only mean that other things being qualitatively and quantitatively equal, those with the additional qualification have to be preferred. There is no question of eliminating all others preventing thereby even an effective and comparative consideration on merits, by according en bloc precedence in favour of those in possession of additional qualification irrespective of the respective merits and demerits of all candidates to be considered. [vide Secretary, A.P.Public Service Commission Vs. Y.V.V.R.Srinivasulu (2003) 5 SCC 341].
7. The aforesaid case may not have applicability to the case on hand. However, I am inclined to grant relief in favour of the petitioner. It is made clear that the maximum marks that can be scored by the candidate will be 1020. The minimum qualifying mark for selection for the reserved category is 306 and for the general candidates is 408. In other words, a person who has scored below 306 cannot be selected. Since there are sufficient vacancies and the petitioner states that the service benefits shall be reckoned from the date of appointment, without disturbing the impugned selection list, I direct the second respondent to verify the petitioner's credentials and also hold special oral test for him. Subject to clearing both the stages, the petitioner shall be considered as a selected candidate. The second respondent will thereafter send supplementary selection 14/16
list to the first respondent. The first respondent shall issue formal appointment order appointing the petitioner as Forest Apprentice. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8.This writ petition is allowed on these terms. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 12.08.2024 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No MGA To The Principal Secretary, Environment and Forests Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
15/16
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
MGA 12.08.2024 16/16