Writ petition challenging the selection process for Agricultural Officer post due to non-publication of marks and a specific vacancy ratio. The court directed the examination controller to furnish the petitioner's marks within four weeks.
Direction to the 2nd respondent to furnish the marks secured by the petitioner within four weeks.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 16.09.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE M. DHANDAPANI
W.P.No.543 of 2019 and W.M.P.No.551 of 2019
C.Madhumitha ...Petitioner
vs
1 The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, No.3, Frazer Bridge Road, Park Town, Chennai-600 003.
2 The Controller of Examination, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission No.3 Frazer Bridge Road, Park Town, Chennai-600 003. ... Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of declaration, declaring the selection process being conducted by the Respondents for the direct recruitment to the post of Agricultural Officer (Extension) being called for by the Notification No.9 of 2018 dated 03.05.2018 as far as for not publishing the marks and the ranks of the candidate who have passed written examination and selected for certificate verification and fixing 1 5 ratio for the vacancies arising out of 52 rejected candidates alone for the certificate verification is concerned as null and void.
For Petitioner : Ms.M.Subha For Respondents : Ms.C.N.G.Niraimathi
ORDER
This petition has been filed to declare the selection process being conducted by the respondents for the direct recruitment to the post of Agricultural Officer (Extension) being called for by Notification No.9 of 2018 dated 03.05.2018 for not publishing the marks and the ranks of the candidate, who
have passed written examination and selected for certificate verification and fixing 1:5 ratio for the vacancies arising out of 52 rejected candidates alone for the certificate verification is concerned as null and void.
2.It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner being a B.Sc., (Agri) Graduate has applied to the post of Agricultural Officer (Extension) called for by the 2nd respondent and attended the Written Examination. She was selected for the Certificate verification during the second phase of selection. Without any rational approach, candidates were called in the ratio of 1:5 and the petitioner, who has produced all the Certificates, was rejected without any valid reasons and therefore, she could not participate in the Oral Test. It is the further case of the petitioner that till date the result was not published and the marks in the Written Examination was not furnished.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it would be suffice to issue directions to the 2nd respondent to furnish the marks secured by the petitioner within a reasonable time.
3.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the limited request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court directs the 2nd respondent to furnish the marks secured by the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS III)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
mps
To
1 The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, No.3, Frazer Bridge Road, Park Town, Chennai-600 003.
2 The Controller of Examination, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission No.3 Frazer Bridge Road, Park Town, Chennai-600 003.
W.P.No.543 of 2019 and W.M.P.No.551 of 2019
BP(CO) CS/20/02/2020
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the court should direct the 2nd respondent to furnish the marks scored by the petitioner.
Whether the petitioner was aggrieved by the non-publication of marks and the rejection process.
Whether the petition is maintainable to challenge the selection process ratio and lack of mark disclosure.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
C. Madhumitha
The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission
The Controller of Examination, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission
M. Dhandapani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
