Dismissed

K.G.Vigraanth Bapu v. the Controller of Examinations

Madras HC10 Nov 2023WP/27176/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition challenged the rejection of the petitioner's application for an Assistant Professor post on grounds of non-equivalence of qualifications. The High Court held that it cannot question the Expert Committee's opinion and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. The connected miscellaneous petition also stands dismissed.

K.G.Vigraanth Bapu Vs the Controller of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.27176 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 10.11.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH

¶6

W.P.No.27176 of 2023 and W.M.P.No.26614 of 2023

¶7

Mr.K.G. Vigraanth Bapu

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The Controller of Examinations, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, TNPSC Road, Broadway,

¶11

Chennai – 600 003.

¶12

2.The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, TNPSC Road, Broadway,

¶13

Chennai – 600 003.

¶14

3.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Medical Services Commission, No.417, Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. ... Respondents

¶15

1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

W.P.No.27176 of 2023

¶17

PRAYER:

¶18

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for records relating to the order of the 1^st respondent made in LIST – OT dated 30.08.2023 to quash the same in so far as the petitioner in Registration No.0101001096 is concerned and to consequently direct the respondents to select and appoint the petitioner as Assistant Professor of Psychology cum Clinical Psychologist and to extend all benefits arising thereto.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.L. Chandrakumar For R1 & R2 : Mrs.G. Hema, Standing Counsel For R3 : M/s.Shivakumar & Suresh

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing

¶22

Counsel for the respondents 1 & 2, as well as the learned counsel for the third respondent.

¶23

2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

W.P.No.27176 of 2023

¶25

2. Pursuant to a Notification, calling for applications to fill up the post of Assistant Professor of Psychology cum Clinical Psychologist in the Tamil Nadu Medical Services, the petitioner had applied for the said post and his candidature has been rejected on the ground that he had not uploaded the requisite certificate. As per the Notification, the essential qualification prescribed for the vacancy is Master's Degree in Clinical Psychology. The petitioner possess the certificates of Master of Science in Psychology (Clinical) dated 24.05.2010 from Christ University, as well as Master of Philosophy from the University of Gauhati, whereby, he had qualified for the concerned branch in the examination held in the year 2010 and 2017 respectively.

¶26

3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the first and second respondents/TNPSC, has placed reliance on the averments made in the counter-affidavit and submitted that the qualification of Masters in Science in Psychology (Clinical) from Chirst University is not equivalent

¶27

to the prescribed qualification of Master of Science in Psychology and

¶28

3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

W.P.No.27176 of 2023

¶30

that the petitioner has failed to upload the Equivalence Certificate and therefore, his candidature does not require consideration.

¶31

4. The learned Standing Counsel has also produced a copy of G.O.(Ms) No.244, Higher Education (K1) Department dated 12.09.2023, which is an order of the Recommendations of Equivalence Committee that was constituted on 28.08.2023. As per the said Government Order, the petitioner's qualification of M.Sc. Clinical Psychology awarded by Christ (Deemed to be University), Bangalore, has been ordered as not equivalent to the prescribed qualification of M.Sc. Psychology.

¶32

5. When an Expert Committee, has opined the petitioner's qualification as not equivalent to the prescribed qualification, this Court, exercising its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, will not venture to question such a decision of the Equivalence Committee. Thus, when the petitioner does not possess the essential qualifications prescribed in the Notification, his rejection by TNPSC, cannot be found fault with.

¶33

4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

W.P.No.27176 of 2023

¶35

6. In the result, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.

¶36

Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition also stands

¶37

dismissed.

¶38

10.11.2023

¶39

Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order Internet: Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶40

Sni

¶41

¶42

1.The Controller of Examinations, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, TNPSC Road,

¶43

Broadway, Chennai – 600 003.

¶44

2.The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, TNPSC Road, Broadway, Chennai – 600 003.

¶45

3.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Medical Services Commission, No.417, Pantheon Road,

¶46

Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.

¶47

5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.27176 of 2023

M.S.RAMESH,J.

Sni

W.P.No.27176 of 2023

10.11.2023

6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

K.G.Vigraanth Bapu v. the Controller of Examinations

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.G.Vigraanth Bapu v. the Controller of Examinations

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

V.Jothi Venkatachalapathy Vs Other Departments (Tn)

V.Sridhar Vs The Government of TamilNadu

D.Ramajayam Vs the State of Tamilnadu

V.Vimal Kumar Vs the Chairman Cum Managing Director

V.Janakiraman Vs Mr. Naresh

M.Devan Vs N.Saravanan