Dismissed¶37

Ravindran v. the Member Secretary

Madras HC10 Jul 2025WP(MD)/25256/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Laboratory Technician Grade II recruitment; Medical Service Recruitment Board (MRB); Notification dated 31.01.2016; weightage marks calculation; one year versus two years Diploma in Medical Laboratory Technology; Clause 6B priority to two-year Diploma holders; cut-off mark for certificate verification; CV Intimation No.08/MRB/2016 dated 12.11.2019; writ of certiorarified mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; writ petition dismissed, no costs; connected W.M.P.(MD) Nos.21865 and 21866 of 2025 closed.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner's total weightage mark of 54.69 was correctly calculated and is not in deviation with any of the illustrations given for calculating the weightage marks. ¶36

Ravindran Vs the Member Secretary — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶37

Issue for consideration

Whether the weightage marks awarded to the petitioner, a one-year Diploma in Medical Laboratory Technology holder whose course total was 900 marks, were properly calculated when the weightage schedule spoke of 450 marks as the total for Diploma holders. +1 more

¶25

Court's answer

The petitioner's total weightage mark of 54.69 was correctly calculated and is not in deviation with any of the illustrations given for calculating the weightage marks.

¶36

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner's candidature was not rejected on the basis of weightage marks; his non-selection rested on the other ground stated by the respondent.

¶36

Key takeaways

As per the explanation to Clause 6B of the Notification, since sufficient number of candidates from the two years Diploma course were available, the Department did not resort to appointing one year certificate course holders, and the procedure contemplated under Clause 6B stands against the petitioner's claim; hence the prayer cannot be granted.ratio¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition dismissed. The petitioner, holder of a one-year Diploma/Certificate in Medical Laboratory Technology, challenged CV Intimation No.08/MRB/2016 dated 12.11.2019 of the Medical Service Recruitment Board intimating the cut-off mark for certificate verification for recruitment to the post of Laboratory Technician Grade-II, contending that his weightage marks were wrongly computed (his course total was 900 while the weightage schedule spoke of 450 marks for Diploma holders). Held: (i) the petitioner's total weightage of 54.69 was correctly calculated and not in deviation with the illustrations in the Notification dated 31.01.2016; (ii) his candidature was not rejected on the basis of weightage marks; and (iii) under the explanation to Clause 6B of the Notification, since sufficient candidates with the two-year Diploma qualification were available, one-year certificate course holders were not considered, and the Clause 6B procedure stands against the petitioner's claim. Writ Petition dismissed with no costs; connected W.M.P.(MD) Nos.21865 and 21866 of 2025 closed.

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.25256 of 2019

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 10.07.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.25256 of 2019

¶7

Ravindran ... Petitioner Vs 1 The Member Secretary, Medical Service Recruitment Board, (MRB) VII Floor, DMS Building, No.359, Anna Salai, Teynampet, Chennai-5. 2 The Director, Office of Directorate of Medical and Rural Services, DMS Building, No.359, Anna Salai, Teynampet, Chennai-5. ... Respondents

¶8

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the records relating to CV Intimation No.08/MRB/2016, dated 12.11.2019, of the 1st respondent herein with regard to the appointment to the post of

¶9

Page 1 of 7

¶10

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

¶11

W.P.(MD) No.25256 of 2019

¶12

Laboratory Technician Grade II and quash the same and consequently direct

¶13

the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Laboratory Technician Grade II.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Niresh Kumar

¶15

For Respondent 1 : Mr.V.Ramesh

¶16

For Respondent 2 : Mr.N.Sathish Kumar, Addl. Govt. Pleader.

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition, challenging the

¶19

proceedings issued by the first respondent, intimating the cut-off mark for certificate verification.

¶20

The petitioner has applied for the post of Laboratory Technician Grade-II, as per the Notification of the first respondent, dated 31.01.2016. According to him, the selection was based on weightage marks awarded based on educational qualification. According to the petitioner, the educational qualification requisite for the post he applied is Diploma or Certificate in Medical Laboratory Technology Course (two years,) conducted by the King Institute of Preventive Medicine or from any other institution recognised by the Government of Tamil Nadu for the said purpose. Provided that if candidates with the above qualification are not available, then candidates with Certificate in Medical Laboratory Technology (one year duration) conducted by the

¶21

_____________ Page 2 of 7_

¶22

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

¶23

W.P.(MD) No.25256 of 2019

¶24

institutions recognised by the Government of Tamil Nadu for this purpose shall be appointed. If there are adequate number of qualified candidates with a pass in Diploma in Medical Laboratory Technology course (two years duration) available, they alone will be considered for selection in respect of all the notified vacancies. If there is inadequate number of qualified candidates with Diploma in Medical Laboratory Technology (two years duration) qualification, the remaining vacancies will be filled with qualified candidates with certificate in Medical Laboratory Technology (one year duration) qualification. Further, the system of awarding weightage marks has been given in Clause 7 of the Notification.

¶25

The petitioner studied Diploma in Medical Laboratory Technology (one year duration). According to him, the total mark for this certificate course is 900, whereas the schedule given for awarding the weightage marks only speaks about 450 marks as total for the Diploma holders, thereby his weightage has not been properly calculated. Hence, he has come forward with this Writ Petition, challenging the weightage marks and also challenging the cut-off mark fixed for the entire selection.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that not only there is improper calculation for the weightage marks but also the petitioner has not been given an opportunity to participate in the next stage of selection process.

¶27

Page 3 of 7

¶28

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

¶29

W.P.(MD) No.25256 of 2019

¶30

Mr.V.Ramesh, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Board, submits that notification for the selection process was issued with two types of educational qualifications, which have been stated in Clause 6B of the Notification and, as per the Notification, those who have studied two years Diploma course will have priority over the persons, who are holding one year certificate course. He further submits that it has been made clear in the notification that if the qualified candidates from the two years Diploma course are available, then the candidates with one year certificate course will not be considered for selection. Knowing fully well that the petitioner is a one year certificate holder, he cannot contend that he is not considered for the selection process. owing to the reason that the recruiting authority has received sufficient number of candidates from two years Diploma holders. On that ground alone, the petitioner has not been considered for selection process. He has also demonstrated before this Court how marks have been calculated for awarding weightage to the petitioner's case.

¶31

I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the records.

¶32

It has been demonstrated before me that the petitioner has secured 596 marks in his one year Diploma course out of total marks of 900,

¶33

Page 4 of 7

¶34

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

¶35

W.P.(MD) No.25256 of 2019

¶36

which is equivalent to 33.11 weightage mark for this Diploma stream. Similarly, in other two streams, such as S.S.L.C., and Higher Secondary School, he has secured total weightage mark of 21.58. Accordingly, total weightage mark has been arrived at 54.69 and this calculation is not in deviation with any of the illustrations given for calculating the weightage marks. But, the candidature of the petitioner has not been rejected on the basis of weightage marks. His selection was not made on the other ground stated by the respondent, that as per explanation to Clause 6B of the Notification, since sufficient number of candidates from two years Diploma course are available, the Department has not resorted to appoint one year certificate course holders. It has also been reiterated in the counter affidavit of the respondent and there is no dispute about it. The procedure contemplated under Clause 6B of the Notification stands against the claim of the petitioner. Therefore, the prayer sought for in this Writ Petition cannot be granted in favour of the petitioner.

¶37