Disposed

G. Balaji, S/O.S.Ganesan, v. the Secretary

Madras HC14 Mar 2013WP(MD)/3909/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the Madras High Court ordered the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission to consider the petitioner's representation dated 17.12.2012 concerning selection in existing vacancies created under Ex-Servicemen quota. The court explicitly directed the creation of a reserve list was not granted.

What did the court decide?

Directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 17.12.2012 and pass suitable orders within four weeks; the prayer to create a reserve list was not allowed.

G. Balaji, S/O.S.Ganesan, Vs the Secretary — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 14.03.2013 CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.RAMANATHAN

¶4

W.P(MD)No.3909 of 2013

G.Balaji

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Fracier Bridge Road, Next to Dental Hospital, Chennai. ... Respondent

¶9

Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 17.12.2012 and to select the petitioner(Reg.No.01015100) against the existing vacancies as not filled in General turn under Ex-Servicemen quota which includes in combined subordinate services examination I 2010 Group II Non-interview posts as notified by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission in 'Daily Thanthi' dated 30.12.2010 and also a create a Reserve list for the selection of candidates.

¶10

For Petitioner :Mr.S.Vijayakumar

¶11

For Respondent :Mr.S.P.Maharajan Standing Counsel

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The petitioner applied for the post of Assistant called for by the respondent in Group-II Services and wrote the examination on 30.07.2011 and secured 237 marks and was given rank No.3234. The petitioner belongs to the General turn and according to the petitioner for the marks secured in the examination he is eligible to get selection only to the non-interview post included to Combined Subordinate Services Grade I and Grade II. It is further stated that the respondent also issued the notification dated 30.12.2010 stating that if no qualified and suitable Ex-Servicemen belonging to a particular category is available for selection for appointment against reserved turn such turn shall be filled up by a candidate other than the Ex-Servicemen and at present there are 26 vacancies yet to be filled in general turn under Ex-Servicemen https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ quota and in the entire general turn list his rank is 1^st position and if Ex-Servicemen quota is filled up from other non Ex-

¶14

¶15

Servicemen general turn candidates the petitioner may get selection for the appointment in Group-II non-interview post and therefore sent a representation dated 17.12.2012, to select the petitioner in the existing vacancy not filled in general turn and Ex-Servicemen quota and the same was not considered and therefore this writ petition is filed for the relief stated above.

¶16

2.It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the respondent may be directed to consider the representation of the petitioner and also create the reserve list for the selection of candidates.

¶17

3.Mr.Maharajan, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent submitted that the representation of the petitioner may be considered by the respondent but the creation of reserve list cannot be entertain as the recruitment process is going on.

¶18

4.Considering the limited scope of prayer sought for by the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 17.12.2012 and pass suitable orders in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. No costs.

¶19

Sd/Deputy Registrar(Accounts)

/True Copy/

Assistant Registrar

The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Fracier Bridge Road, Next to Dental Hospital, Chennai.

¶24

+One cc to Mr.S.P.Maharajan, Advocate, Sr.No.14151

¶25

gsr RL/3c - 20/3/2013

¶26

W.P(MD)No.3909 of 2013

¶27

14.03.2013

¶28

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

G. Balaji, S/O.S.Ganesan, v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G. Balaji, S/O.S.Ganesan, v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A. Suyambulingam, Vs the Managing Director

M. Ganesan, Vs the District Collector

Dr.P.Anandaraj, Vs the Secretary to Govt.

K.Chandra Segaran, Vs the Director of School

N. Prasath, Vs the Secretary

K. Karuppiah, Vs the District Educational