Dismissed

C.Pratheeswara v. The State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC7 Apr 2022WP/5856/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment dismisses a writ petition challenging an answer key and requesting admission to the main examination for the Tamil Nadu Public Services. The court noted that interim orders allowed specific candidates to write the exam after re-evaluation, and the petition was dismissed as there was nothing left for adjudication.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed on the basis that the interim order regarding the disputed question had been implemented and candidates were allowed to appear for the main examination.

C.Pratheeswara Vs The State of Tamilnadu — Education and Admissions | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 07.04.2022

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶5

W.P.No.5856 of 2021 and

¶6

W.M.P.Nos.6438, 6440, 6441, 6442, 6443 & 24797 of 2021 and 4156 of 2022

¶7

1.C.Pratheeswara 2.C.Tamilselvan 3.T.S.Adhithyan 4.K.Keerthy 5.V.Vigneswar Singh 6.M.Pradeep Rajan 7.R.Nithiya 8.X.Sahaya Jerwin Singh 9.S.Abimanyu 10.P.Sathyanarayanan 11.T.Priyadharshini 12.A.Gurupandiyan 13.K.Arun 14.S.Aaron Vallarasu 15.S.Vigneshwaran 16.N.R.Senthilkumar 17.S.Asharani 18.N.Theivakkani 19.M.Muthumanikam 20.M.Kasiraja ... Petitioners Vs. 1. The State of Tamil Nadu represented by its Secretary to Government Personnel and A.R.Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009. 2. The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, represented by its Secretary, TNPSC Road, V.O.C. Street Park Town, Chennai – 600 003. 3. The Controller of Examination, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commissioner, TNPSC Road, V.O.C.Street, Park Town, Chennai – 600 003. ... Respondent

¶8

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

¶9

PRAYER: This Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the respondents relating to key answers published by the third respondent in the second respondent website on 07.01.2021 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to revise the said answer key and the said list of selected candidates and permit the petitioners to write main examination along with candidates who already found eligible to writ main written examination.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kolandasamy

¶11

For R1 : Mrs.S.Anitha Special Government Pleader

¶12

For R2 & R3 : Mr.P.S.Raman, Senior Counsel for Mr.V.Govardhanan Standing Counsel

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

This writ petition has been filed to call for the records relating to key answers published by the third respondent in the second respondent website on 07.01.2021 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to revise the said answer key and the said list of selected candidates and permit the petitioners to write main examination along with candidates who already found eligible to writ main written examination.

¶15

2.When this writ petition came up for hearing on 03.03.2022, by considering the arguments of the parties, this Court passed the interim order as follows:

¶16

“4.Considering the above submissions and in view of the doubt raised by the fresh expert committee in respect of key answer to Question No.58, this Court, without going into the merits and in the interest of parties, directs the respondent/TNPSC to permit the writ petitioners, who have reached the cut off marks in the preliminary examinations, after they have been awarded 1.5 marks for Question No.58, to appear for the main examinations to be held on 04.03.2022.TNPSC is also directed to issue hall tickets to those persons, if possible before 9.00

¶17

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

¶18

a.m on 04.03.2022. It is made clear that this interim order will apply to the writ petitioners alone and it is passed without prejudice to the rights and contention of the parties and the results of the writ petitioners shall not be published, until further orders from this Court. This Court would also like to appreciate the assistance rendered by the professors, as nominated by TNPSC, for giving fresh expert opinion.”

¶19

3.The status report has been filed by the second and third respondents in the form of the affidavit and the relevant paragraphs are extracted hereunder:

¶20

“7.This answering respondent submits that among 59 questions which were placed before the fresh expert committee, for 59 questions including those five questions that wee not challenged by the candidates during the challenge window period, experts concurred with the answers finalised by the expert committee constituted for the finalization of answer keys. For only one question, that is for question No.58, the answer arrived by the fresh expert committee as A & C is differed/changed from the answer finalised by the expert committee constituted earlier for finalization of answer keys which is A.

¶21

58.The colour of the skin in ripened apple, tomato and grape fruits is due to accumulation of

¶22

(A) Carotenoid (B) Lycopene (C) Anthocyanin (D) Ethylene

¶23

(E) Answer now known

¶24

gGj;j Mg;gps;. jf;fhsp kw;Wk; jpuhl;irapd; njhypd; epwj;jpw;Ff; fhuzk;

¶25

(A) fnuhl;odha;L (B) iyf;nfhgPd; (C) Md;njhiradpd; (D) vj;jpypd;

¶26

(E) tpil bjhpatpy;iy

¶27

8.On considering the above fact, the Hon'ble Court has directed the Commission by its order dated 03.03.2022 to award 1.5 marks to the petitioner for Question no.58 and to allow the petitioners to write the Main Written Examination, if they are within the zone of consideration in their respective communal category and to give provisional admission to the Main Written Examination.

¶28

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

¶29

9.In this connection, this answering respondent submits that among the 74 petitioners, 7 petitioners were already admitted to Main Written Examination vide the revised list published by the Commission adhering to the Court order passed in W.P.(MD).No.8025 of 2020 filed by Thiru.G.Sakthirao. Hence, the directions of this Hon'ble Court were applied for the remaining 67 petitioners and among them 5 petitioners alone reached within the zone of consideration. The details of the above said 5 petitioners are as follows:

¶30

Sl.N o.	Reg.No	Name (Thiru./Tmt./Sel vi.)	W.P.No.
1.	0100067100	A.Shanmugasarath i	Petitioner in W.P.No.9760 2021	of
2.	0100146064	S.Aaron Vallarasu	14^th Petitio in W.P.No.5856 2021	ner of
3.	1701009123	T.S.Adithyan	3^rdPetitioner W.P.No.5856 2021	in of
4.	2901012016	B.Krishnaveni	11^th Petitio in W.P.No.5840 2021	ner of
5.	3101006288	R.Saranya	11^th Petitio in W.P.No.5826 2021	ner of

¶31

10.Further, this answering respondent submits that the above said 05 petitioners have been allowed to write the Main Written Examination held on 04.03.2022, 05.03.2022 and 06.03.2022. The Hall Ticket download link, Hall Ticket PDF file have been sent to their e- mail ID and the same has been informed to them over phone. Further the Hard copy of Hall Ticket has also been issued to them at the examination venue.

¶32

12.This answering respondent also submits that despite the eleventh hour efforts taken by the Commission in order to comply with the Interim Order dated 03.03.2022 of the Hon'ble Court, one of the

¶33

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

¶34

petitioner candidate Thiru.S.Aaron Vallarasu (Reg.No.0100146064) has not appeared for the Main Written Examination.”

¶35

4.In view of the above, proposed question papers have been referred to the expert person and based on the report of the expert opinion, the respondent/TNPSC has permitted the candidates to write examinations which was held on 04.03.2022, 05.03.2022 & 06.03.2022. Further, in view of the aforesaid status report filed by the second and third respondents by way of affidavit before this Court, there is nothing survives for further adjudication in the prayer sought for by the writ petitioner in this writ petition. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶36

5.It is made clear that due to urgency, this Court has passed the interim order, the said interim order cannot be cited as precedent in future. This Court appreciates the assistance rendered by Mr.P.S.Raman, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent, accepting the suggestion of this Court, by referring the question to the expert committee nominated by TNPSC.

¶37

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS-V)

¶38

//True Copy//

¶39

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶40

Dua

¶41

¶42

Secretary to Government,

¶43

State of Tamil Nadu Personnel and A.R.Department,

¶44

Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

¶45

The Secretary,

¶46

Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission,

¶47

TNPSC Road, V.O.C. Street

¶48

Park Town, Chennai – 600 003.

¶49

The Controller of Examination,

¶50

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

¶51

Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, TNPSC Road, V.O.C.Street, Park Town, Chennai – 600 003.

¶52

+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.24529

¶53

(25/05/2022)

¶54

W.P.No.5856 of 2021

¶55

RSV(CO) SU(19/05/2022)

¶56

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

C.Pratheeswara v. The State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.Pratheeswara v. The State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Latha Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Tmt.Savithri, Vs The Chairman

M.Boopathy Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

B.Dhanalakshmi Vs The Chief Managing Director

R.Yogesh Kumar Vs The Tamil Nadu Public Service commission

Nandhini .R Vs The Tamil Nadu Public Service commission