Petitioner challenged the final key answers for three questions in the Teachers Eligibility Test, relying on separate prior writ petitions where similar challenges were rejected. Court dismissed the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 21.11.2013
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU
Writ Petition (MD)No.18504 of 2013 and M.P.(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2013 S.Shunmuga Ananthi .. Petitioner
.vs.
3.The Teachers Recruitment Board, rep.by its Member Secretary, 4th Floor, E.V.K.Sampath Maligai, D.P.I.Campus, College Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 006. .. Respondents
Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned final key answer published by the respondents for the written examination, conducted on 17.08.2013, for direct recruitment to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher for Government Schools in respect of Question Nos.18, 22 and 60 in Booklet Series 'D' is concerned, quashing the same and consequently directing the respondents to revise final key answer and award further marks to the petitioner and to call him for certificate verification.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Guhan
ORDER
The petitioner in this writ petition had written the Teachers Eligibility Test (TNTET) Examination, 2013. The petitioner was https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ supplied with “D” Series Question Paper in Paper-1. According to the petitioner, the key answers given by the Teachers Recruitment Board to Question Nos.18, 22 and 60 are wrong and therefore she has come-up with this writ petition seeking appropriate relief.
2
2.When this matter was listed for admission on 18.11.2013, the learned Special Government Pleader took notice and on his request, the matter was adjourned. Accordingly, the matter is listed today.
3.I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
4.Question No.18 reads as follows:
"18.Main role in moral development is
A) Attitude B) Conscience B) Mental ability D) Feelings".
5.Question No.22 reads as follows:
"22.Physical growth in children is at the maximum rate at the age of A)0 - 2 yrs. B) 2 - 6 yrs. C)6 - 12 yrs. D)12 - 19 yrs."
6.Challenge to the key answers to Question Nos.18 and 22 published by the Teachers Recruitment Board has been decided in a different writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.18223 and 18224 of 2013, dated 13.11.2013, wherein this Court has rejected the contentions of the petitioners therein and held that the key answers published by the Teachers Recruitment Board are correct
answers. Following the same, the challenge made to these two questions in this writ petition is also rejected.
7.Question No.60 reads as follows:
"60. 'jdpg;ghly; jpul;L' vd;Dk; E]}}iy bjhFg;gpj;jth; A) nuhkehjg[ [uk; kd;dh; bghd;Drhkp B) re;jpuBrfu ftpuhrg; gz;ojh; C) jphpTluhrg;gf; ftpuhah; D) mz;zhkiyahh;"
8.Challenge to the key answer to Question No.60 published by the Teachers Recruitment Board has been decided in a different writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.18475 of 2013, dated 21.11.2013, wherein this Court has rejected the contentions of the petitioner therein and held that the key answer published by the Teachers Recruitment Board is the correct answer. Hence, the challenge made to Q.No.60 in is also rejected.
9.Hence, I do not find any merit at all in this writ petition. The writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. No costs. Connected M.P.(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2013 are also dismissed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
/True Copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
3
To
+1cc to Special Government Pleader in SR.No. 57495.
+1cc to Mr. K.Guhan Advocate in SR.No. 54438
TS/12.12.2013/3P-6C
Order in
W.P(MD)No.18504/2013
and
MP(MD)Nos.1&2/2013
Dated:21.11.2013
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to relief by issuance of writ of certiorari or mandamus challenging the final key answer published for the teachers eligibility test.
S. Shunmuga Ananthi
The Government of Tamil Nadu
S. Nagamuthu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
