Petitioner challenged her disqualification in a recruitment test citing procedural impropriety. Court examined video evidence showing petitioner cleared the 100m run in 18.06 seconds against the limit of 17.50 seconds. Petitioner found disqualified; writ petition dismissed.
No costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petition closed.
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 : 22.08.2017 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA
W.P.(MD)No.15786 of 2017 and W.M.P.(MD)No.12477 of 2017
V.Nanthini ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Chairman, Tamilnadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board,
Old Commissioner of Police Office Campus,
Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai 600 008.
2.The Chairman / Member, Recruitment Sub Committee, Madurai Centre & Deputy Inspector General of Police, Madurai Range, Madurai. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order dated 09.08.2017 in C.No. R2/150/2017 passed by the 2nd respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents to conduct a fresh efficiency test for the petitioner (Enrolment Number. 7404303) for the Post of Grade -II constable, Grade II Jail Warders and Fireman in the Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board 2017.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Venkatesan
For Respondents : Mr.B.Pugazhendhi,
Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.A.K.Baskara Pandian, Special Government Pleader
O R D E R
***************
By consent of both parties, this writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.
2.The petitioner, having passed S.S.L.C, applied for the post of Grade -II Police Constables / Grad-II Jail Warders / Fireman – 2017, when applications were called for by the respondent Police https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Department. Subsequently, after passing the written examination, the petitioner was called for the Physical Endurance Test.
2
3.Now, the grievance of the petitioner appears to be that the respondents have not seen her properly in the running event and as a result, she has been found disqualified.
5.As per the said direction, the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondent Police Department produced the video recordings and the same was played before me in the presence of the learned counsel on either side, the petitioner and two of the representatives of the Department.
6.From the video recording, it is very clear that the petitioner had taken 18.06 seconds in the 100 mtrs running event, whereas, for being qualified, the petitioner has to cover the 100 mtrs event within 17.50 seconds. As the petitioner did not cover the same, within the time limit, she is rightly found disqualified by the respondent Police Department.
7.This Court does not find any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order of rejection. Therefore, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(Records)
/True Copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1.The Chairman,
Tamilnadu Uniformed
Services Recruitment Board,
Old Commissioner of Police Office Campus, Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai.
2.The Chairman,
Recruitment Sub Committee, Madurai Centre & Deputy Inspector General of Police, Madurai Range, Madurai. +1cc to M/S.R.VENKATESAN, Advocate SR.No.73924 +1cc to Special Government Pleader, SR.No. 74258 gk
MAS/MR-KKR/SAR2:14.09.2017:2P-5C
W.P.(MD)No.15786 of 2017 and W.M.P.(MD)No.12477 of 2017 22.08.2017
2 issues framed by the court
Whether failure to qualify in the 100m running event within the prescribed time limit constitutes a valid ground for disqualification from the recruitment posts.
Whether there was any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order rejecting the petitioner's candidacy based on the running test results.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
V.Nanthini
The Chairman, Tamilnadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board
The Chairman / Member, Recruitment Sub Committee
Deputy Inspector General of Police
T. Raja
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
