Madras High Court
S.Sivasankar vs The Recruitment Committee on 7 January, 2022
Author: C.Saravanan
Bench: C.Saravanan
W.P.No.43220 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RESERVED ON : 26.08.2021
PRONOUNCED ON : 07.01.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
W.P. No.43220 of 2016
and W.M.P.Nos.37046,37045 of 2016 and
W.M.P.Nos.1999 and 20778 of 2017
(Through Video Conferencing)
S.Sivasankar ... Petitioner
vs
The Recruitment Committee,
Tamil Nadu Forest Uniformed Services,
9th Floor, Panagal Maaligai,
Saidapet, Chennai 600 015. .. Respondent
Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to
select and appoint the petitioner to anyone of the post as mentioned in the
Advertisement No.1/2014 dated 22.12.2014 published by the respondent,
since the petitioner comes within the zone of consideration .
1/18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.43220 of 2016
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Rajasekar for
Mr.V.Karthikeyan
For Respondent : Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal
Government Advocate.
ORDER
In this Writ Petition, an interim order was passed on 12.12.2016 by directing the respondent to permit the petitioner to participate in the physical test and thereafter for interview by a separate order dated 10.02.2017.
2. This writ petition has been filed to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to select and appoint the petitioner in anyone of the posts as mentioned in the Advertisement No.1/2014 dated 22.12.2014 published by the respondent.
3. Advertisement No.1/2014 dated 22.12.2014 was issued in consonance with G.O.Ms.No.132, Environment and Forest (FR2) Department, dated 18.06.2002.
2/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.43220 of 2016
4. As per Advertisement No.1/2014 dated 22.12.2014, the rules of reservation as applicable as per the Tamil Nadu Government Rules and order in force were to be made applicable.
5. As per, Clause No.3 (i) to G.O.Ms.No.132, dated 18.06.2002, about 10% of the vacancies were reserved for direct recruitment on horizontal basis for the following posts in the Forest Department:-
(i) Forester
(ii) Forest Guard
(iii) Forest Watcher
(iv) Driver for outstanding sports persons:
i. who have represented the State at Senior or Junior levels during the last three years; or ii. who represented the Universities, or iii. who had represented the country in recognised National/International competition; and iv. have won top places 3/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.43220 of 2016
6. G.O.Ms.No.132 Environment and Forest (FR2) Department, dated 18.06.2002 also stipulated that there was no direct recruitment for the post of Forester and as and when the direct recruitment to the post of Forester was restored, the said Government Order will be implemented for the post of Forester.
7. The petitioner had participated in the recruitment announced by the respondent for the post of Forester under the sports category vide Advertisement No.1/2014 dated 22.12.2014.
8. The contention of the petitioner in this writ petition is that the petitioner had applied for the post of Forester under the sports category as the petitioner had not only represented Bharathidasan University between 02.10.2011 and 07.10.2011 but also earlier for the Alagappa University between 18.10.2010 and 23.10.2010.
9. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that strict application of the aforesaid G.O.Ms.No.132, dated 18.06.2002, cannot be made/ imposed as sporting event take place during the academic years and the 4/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.43220 of 2016 academic years normally starts from the month of June and July whereas the recruitment Notification was issued for the first time on 22.12.2014 as a result of which the petitioner lost a legitimate chance to be selected.
10. It is therefore submitted that a strict application for the aforesaid requirement of Government Order was arbitrary as the petitioner was getting ousted. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner had participated in the examinations as per the above Notification and had secured 133.6 marks out of 200.
11. It is submitted that the petitioner was thereafter called for certificate verification. After certificate verification, the petitioner was however not called for physical test and for interview as the petitioner did not meet the three years criteria.
12. He further submits that the cut off marks of candidates belonging to MBC/DC under sports quota was 60.80 and since the petitioner had secured 133.6 marks in the written examination and therefore there was no justification in not calling the petitioner to the next stage of selection 5/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.43220 of 2016 process.
13. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has secured 155.6 marks out of 200 marks after the interview whereas cut off marks for the candidates who was selected under the Sports quota in this category scored was lower marks.
14. He therefore submits that the non selection of the petitioner under on account of strict application of G.O.Ms.No.132, Environment and Forest (FR2) Department, dated 18.06.2002 was arbitrary.
15. The learned Government Advocate for the respondent submits that the petitioner had not qualified under sports quota. It is submitted that merely because the petitioner participated in the tournament would not make the petitioner eligible for being appointed as Forester in terms of G.O.Ms.No.132 dated 18.06.2002.
16. The learned Government Advocate for the respondents referred to 6/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.43220 of 2016 the Information Brochure of the Tamil Nadu Forest Uniformed Services Recruitment Committee, wherein it has been clarified that candidate should not only have an outstanding qualification in the sports but also should have won the Tournament. He referred to Paragraph 5 which is re-produced below:-
“KJepiy my;yJ ,sepiy (Senior or Junior levels) mstpyhd tpisahl;Lg; nghl;ofspy; kl;Lk; fle;j Kd;whz;Lfspy; (mwptpf;if btspaplg;gl;l ehSf;F Kd;g[) khepyj;jpw;fhfg; g';nfw;W my;yJ gy;fiyf;fHf mstpyhd nghl;ofs; kw;Wk; m';fPfupf;fg;gl;l njrpa-rh;tnjrg; nghl;ofspy; ehl;ow;fhfg; g';nfw;W 1?tJ. 2?tJ kw;Wk; 3?tJ cau; ,l';fisg; bgw;W btw;wp bgw;w jiyrpwe;j tpisahl;L tPuu;fs; MfpnahUf;F. tdtu;-fs cjtpahsh;. tdf;fhg;ghsu;. Xl;Leu; cupkj;Jld; Toa tdf;fhg;ghsu;. tdf;fhtyu; Mfpa gjtpfspy; Mjpjpuhtplu; tFg;gpdu; Mjpjpuhtplu;(mUe;jjpah;)- gH';Foapdu;-kpft[k; gpw;gLj;jg;gl;l tFg;gpdu;-rPu;kugpdu;- ,!;yhkpau;-my;yhj gpw;gLj;jg;gl;l tFg;gpdu;- gpw;gLj;jg;gl;l tFg;gpdu; (,!;yhkpau;)-bghJg;nghl;o Mfpa xt;bthU tif xJf;fPl;ow;Fs;Sk; 10 fhyp ,l';fs; murhiz (epiy) vz;/132. tdj;(tdk;?2)Jiw. ehs; 18/06/2002d;go xJf;fPL bra;ag;gLk;/”
17. The learned Government Advocate for the respondent submits that only a person possessing requisite certificate for having represented the State at Senior or Junior level during the last three years or who have represented the Universities or those who have represented the Country in the recognized 7/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.43220 of 2016 National/International competitions and had won top places are entitled for horizontal reservation in direct recruitment to the post of Forester.
18. By way of rejoinder, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the rival candidate Saravanan.R who was appointed against sports quota (MBC/DC) but did not have requisite certificates in terms of G.O.Ms.No.132, Environment and Forest (FR2) Department, dated 18.06.2002.
19. It is submitted that the petitioner has missed the three years requirement by few months inasmuch as the petitioner participated in the matches held between 02.10.2011 and 07.10.2011 in the Bharathidasan University and between 18.10.2010 and 23.10.2010 in Alagappa University whereas the post of Forester was announced only vide Notification No.1 of 2014 dated 22.12.2014 for the petitioner. It is therefore submitted that the petitioner ought to have been selected in place of Saravanan.R.
20. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent. 8/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.43220 of 2016
21. The learned counsel for the petitioner stated that 19 posts were to be reserved separately under sports category under 10% horizontal reservation in G.O.Ms.No.132, Environment and Forest (FR2) Department, dated 18.06.2002.
22. However, the total number of 165 vacancies for the post of Forester under the recruitment notification was detailed below:-
Sl.No. Name of the Name of the Number Scale of Pay Post Department/Corpo of rations Vacancies 1 FORESTER Tamil Nadu Forest 148 Rs.9300-
Department 34800+G.P.4400
(TNFD) (PB-2)
2 FORESTER Tamil Nadu Forest 17 Rs.9300-
Plantation 34800+G.P.4400
Corporation Limited (PB-2)
(TAFPCORN)
Total 165
23. About 69% of the posts in Government Department are reserved for various communities in the following proportion as per the Tamil Nadu, 9/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.43220 of 2016 Act 1994:-
BC 30%
MBC/DN 20%
SC/SC(A) 18%
ST 1%
69%
24. Thus, out of 165 posts of Forester in the Notification No.1/2014 dated 22.12.2014, 20% of 165 (148 + 17) would have been reserved for MBC/DC candidates. In other words, approximately 33 vacancies were reserved for MBC/DC candidates.
25. The notification calling for application to the post of Forester and Field Assistant also clearly states that Rules of reservation is applicable as per the Tamil Nadu Government Rules and orders were in force.
26. Thus, out 33 vacancies vertically reserved for MBC/DC communities, 10% preference was to be given under the sports quota. In other words, 3 appointments were to be made among the outstanding sports 10/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.43220 of 2016 candidates.
27. Therefore, the question to be determined is whether the petitioner could have got selected to the posts if horizontal reservation recognized in Notification No.1 of 2014 dated 22.12.2014 read with G.O.Ms.No.132, Environment and Forest (FR2) Department, dated 18.06.2002 was applied and whether the petitioner can be said to have possessed requisite qualification even if three years in notification was relaxed considering the fact that the recruitments are not periodical but as and when vacancies arise?
28. There is a long history in encouraging sports person to get employed in Government services. Even in admission in the professional educational courses, persons with sports back ground have been given preference.
29. The Government of Tamil Nadu has also issued Government Orders to give preference in appointments to various post in the Government service to “Outstanding Sports Persons”.11/18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.43220 of 2016
30. As far as the Forest Department is concerned, the then Principal Chief Conservator of Forests had submitted a proposal for giving 10% reservation to Sports persons in the Direct Recruitment to the post of Foresters, Forest Guards, Forest, Forest Watchers and Drivers in the Tamil Nadu Forest Subordinate Service.
31. The Government examined the proposal of the then Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and accepted the same and thus issued G.O.Ms.No.132 dated 18.06.2002 of the Environment and Forest (FR.2) Department.
32. In G.O.Ms.No.132 dated 18.06.2002 of the Environment and Forest (FR.2) Department, Reservation to an extent of 10% on horizontal basis was recognized for “Outstanding Sports Persons” who have represented the State at Senior or Junior levels during last 3 years or those who have represented the country in recognized national/International Competition and won top places was made.
12/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.43220 of 2016
33. Clause 3(i) of G.O.Ms.No.132, Environment and Forest (FR.2) Department dated 18.06.2002, reads as under:-
“a. Reservation to the extent of 10% will be made on horizontal basis for outstanding Sports Persons who have represented the State at Senior or Junior levels during last 3 years or who have represented the Universities or those who have represented the country in recognized national/International Competition and won top places, in direct recruitment to the following posts in the Forest Department.
b. 1.Forester c. 2. Forest Guard d. 3. Forest Watcher e. 4.Driver”
34. When the above Government Order was issued in 2002 it was made clear that there was no proposal for direct recruitment for these posts and as and when direct recruitment is restored, this order will be implemented.
35. The Notification for direct recruitment to the post of Forester was issued on 22.12.2014 vide notification No.1/2014. The petitioner applied for the post of a forester against the sports quota for having participated 13/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.43220 of 2016 between 02.10.2011 and 07.10.2011 and between 18.10.2010 and 23.10.2010.
36. The petitioner had earlier represented the “Bharathidasan University, Trichy in the South Zone inter University Tournament held between 02.10.2011 to 07.10.2011 at University of Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram.
37. Similarly, the petitioner had participated in the South Zone inter University Tournament held at V.I.T. University, Vellore between 18.10.2010 and 23.10.2010. There the petitioner had represented the Alagappa University, Karaikudi. In the aforesaid Tournament, the team represented by the petitioner had lost in the II Round.
38. The participation of the petitioner in these sporting events were beyond three years from the date of notification No.1/2014 dated 22.12.2014. Thus, the petitioner who was otherwise educationally qualified, failed to meet the above requirement of Notification No.1/2014 14/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.43220 of 2016 dated 22.12.2014 read with G.O.Ms.No.132, Environment and Forest (FR.2) Department dated 18.06.2002 .
39. The expression used is “Outstanding Sports Persons” who has represented the State at Junior or Senior levels during the last three years or who have represented the Universities or those who had represented the Country in the recognized National and International sports and won top places. Such a candidate should have won top places in the sporting events.
40. A reading of the Clause No.3(i) of the G.O.Ms.No.132, Environment and Forest (FR.2) Department dated 18.06.2002 makes it clear that to get preferential treatment in appointment, the candidate should be an “Outstanding Sporting Person”.
41. The petitioner was a footballer. A football game is played by a team consisting of minimum of 11 players on field with two or more substitutes. A team either wins or looses in a tournament. It is also not clear whether the petitioner had participated in the tournament as a regular 15/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.43220 of 2016 player or was merely a substitute player.
42. Even where a team looses, the performance of an individual players do not normally go unnoticed or not recognised. A special certificate is issued to such outstanding players. The facts on records indicates that the certificate produced by the petitioner merely indicate that the petitioner's team participated in the Tournament held between the aforesaid dates.
43. The records filed show that no special certificate was conferred of the petitioner certifying that the petitioner was an “Outstanding Sports Person”. Mere participation in sporting events ipso facto will not mean that a candidate was an “Outstanding Sports Person”.
44. If the petitioner had possessed any such certificate to indicate that the petitioner was an “Outstanding Sports Person”, three years condition in Notification No.1/2014 dated 22.12.2014 read with G.O.Ms.No.132, Environment and Forest (FR.2) Department dated 18.06.2002 could have been relaxed in favour of the petitioner. In absence, there is no merits in the present writ petition.
16/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.43220 of 2016
45. In absence of any records to show that the petitioner was an “Outstanding Sports Person” no interference is called. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for any special equity. The fact that the petitioner has made certain allegation against a rival candidate is of no significance. The said person is not before this Court. Further, 7 years have lapsed.
46. Therefore, this writ petition is therefore liable to be dismissed and it is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
07.01.2022 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No kkd C.SARAVANAN,J.
17/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.43220 of 2016 kkd Pre-delivery Order in W.P. No.43220 of 2016 07.01.2022 18/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis