D.Anitha vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 28 February, 2018

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

D.Anitha vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 28 February, 2018

Bench: S.M.Subramaniam

        

 

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT               
DATED: 28.02.2018  
CORAM   
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM              

W.P.(MD) No.1249 of 2013  
and 
W.M.P.(MD)No.3 of 2013  

1.D.Anitha
2.Kamaladevi 
3.Bhanumathi 
4.S.Umavathi                                                    ... Petitioners

Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
   Represented by the Secretary to Government,
   Personal and Administrative Reforms (S) Department,
   Secretariat,
   Chennai-600 009.

2.The Secretary,
   Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, 
    Near Government Dental Medical College,
    Frazer Bridge Road,
    V.O.C Nagar, Park Town,
    Chennai-600 003.                                            ... Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying to issue a Writ of  Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records
of the first respondent relating to G.O.Ms.No.145(P&AR) Department dated
30.09.2010 and quash the portion relating to the illustration and
consequential wrong selection made by the second respondent on 09.10.2012 and  
20.11.2012 for the interview posts and non-interview posts respectively under
Group-II Examination and consequently direct the respondents to issue amended 
Government Order so as to serve the purpose of thirty percent of special
reservation in the SC Women Category other than PSTM and issue fresh  
selection notification by the TNPSC within a specified time frame that may be
fixed by this Court.
!For Petitioners                 : No appearance 

^For R1                  : Mr.R.Sethuraman         
                                                   Special Government Pleader
                For R2                  : Mr.K.K.Senthil


:ORDER

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission brought to the notice of this Court that the writ petitioners are D.Anitha, Kamaladevi, Banumathi and S.Umavathi and except S.Umavathi, all of them were already selected and appointed into the service. Hence, no further adjudication is required in this writ petition in respect of the fourth petitioner/S.Umavathi.

2.The learned counsel appearing for the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission states that the said S.Umavathi had not reached the zone of consideration, as the candidate had not secured the required cut off marks in the selection process. Thus, the fourth petitioner was not selected and there is no scope for further adjudication in respect of accommodating the fourth respondent.

3.In these circumstances, no further adjudication is required in this writ petition. The writ petition stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

To The Secretary to Government, Personal and Administrative Reforms (S) Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madras High Court