Madras High Court
G.Subramanian vs The Teachers Recruitment Board on 7 July, 2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCHOF THE MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED:07.07.2014
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU
Writ Petition (MD)No.4012 of 2010
and
M.P.(MD)No.2 of 2010
G.Subramanian ... Petitioner
vs.
1.The Teachers Recruitment Board,
rep.by its Chairman,
D.P.I.Compound, College Road,
Chennai-600 006.
2.The Regional Director of Collegiate Education,
Tirunelveli Region, Tirunelveli.
3.Chattanatha Karayalar College of Arts
and Science, now renamed as Sriram
Nallamani Yadhava Arts College,
rep.by its Secretary,
Tenkasi, Tirunelveli District.
4.The Principal,
Chattanatha Karayalar College of Arts
and Science, now renamed as Sriram
Nallamani Yadhava Arts College,
rep.by its Secretary,
Tenkasi, Tirunelveli District. ... Respondents
Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the
records pertaining to the impugned Service Certificate issued by the 4th
respondent in No.Nil, dated 12.11.2007, countersigned by the 2nd respondent and
the consequential impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in
Rc.No.2456/A6/09, dated 01.02.2010, quashing the same and consequently directing
the 1st respondent to issue appointment order to the petitioner for the post of
Lecturer in Chemistry.
(Prayer amended as per order dated 21.03.2012,
made in M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2012)
!For Petitioner : Mr.R.Subramanian
^For Respondents-1 : Mr.S.Kumar,
& 2 Addl.Govt.Pleader.
For Respondents-3&4 : Mr.R.Sreenivasan
:ORDER
The Teachers Recruitment Board, Government of Tamil Nadu, issued an Advertisement calling for applications for recruitment of Lecturers in Tamil Nadu Collegiate Educational Service for Government Arts and Science Colleges for 2008. The petitioner applied for the post of Lecturer in Chemistry. The selection process involves two stages. During the first stage of verification of certificates, marks would be awarded for teaching experience, educational qualifications such as Ph.D., M.Phil. with NET of UGC/CSIR/JRF or SLET of Universities and research contribution. The second stage involves interview. The petitioner was called for certificate verification, during which he was awarded weightage marks of 10 for the teaching experience produced by him at the time of certificate verification on 06.03.2009. Since the petitioner could not produce certificate relating to his teaching experience, countersigned by the competent authorities, he was directed to produce the same. The case of the petitioner then was that the 3rd respondent, under whom the petitioner was working, did not give experience certificate. Therefore, he, along with similarly placed persons, filed writ petitions in W.P.(MD)No.6235 of 2007 etc. batch, in which, by order dated 02.11.2007, this Court issued a direction to the College Authorities to issue permanent service certificates. Accordingly, when the petitioner approached the college, they still did not issue any certificate. Therefore, the petitioner had to file even contempt proceedings. Finally, the 4th respondent, the principal of the 3rd respondent College, issued a permanent service certificate on 12.07.2009, stating that the petitioner had worked as Lecturer in the Department of Bio-Chemistry between 18.10.1994 and 11.04.2002. That was countersigned by the Joint Director Collegiate Education, Tirunelveli, on 13.07.2007. When that certificate was produced, the Teachers Recruitment Board did not rightly accept the same. Therefore, the petitioner filed yet another writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.5033 of 2009. In that writ petition, this Court issued a direction to the Teachers Recruitment Board to consider the above service certificate and award marks for the teaching experience and then to proceed further. Thereafter, the Teachers Recruitment Board, by its proceedings in Rc.No.2456/A6/09, dated 01.02.2010, declined to give any marks because the subject taught by the petitioner was not Chemistry but it was Bio-Chemistry. At that juncture, the petitioner filed the present writ petition, seeking to quash the order passed by the Teachers Recruitment Board, dated 01.02.2010.
2.When the writ petition was so pending, the petitioner filed a miscellaneous petition in M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2012 seeking to amend the prayer. Accordingly, as per the order dated 21.03.2012, the prayer was amended in the writ petition. Thus, the present prayer in the writ petition is to quash the Certificate issued by the 4th respondent, dated 12.07.2007 and countersigned by the 2nd respondent, as well as the proceedings of the Teachers Recruitment Board, dated 01.02.2010 and for a further direction to the 1st respondent to issue appointment order to the petitioner.
3.I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the 1st and the 2nd respondents and the learned counsel appearing for the 3rd and the 4th respondents and I have also perused the records, carefully.
4.This Court, by order dated 24.10.2009, issued a direction to the Teachers Recruitment Board to consider the Certificate issued by the 4th respondent on 12.07.2009 and countersigned by the Joint Director of Collegiate Education on 13.07.2009. The said certificate shows that the petitioner had gained experience only in Bio-Chemistry in the 4th respondent College. According to the Teachers Recruitment Board, teaching experience should be in the same subject, namely, Chemistry. Therefore, the petitioner has not been awarded marks. In this conclusion arrived at by the Teachers Recruitment Board, this Court cannot find any fault.
5.Insofar as the issuance of certificate is concerned, this certificate was issued on 13.07.2009. But, the petitioner has chosen to challenge the same only in the year 2012, by filing M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2012 and securing an order on 21.03.2012. Thus, for the delay of three years to challenge the certificate, the petitioner has not offered any explanation. Therefore the petitioner is guilty of laches.
6.Above all, at this length of time, when the Joint Director of Collegiate Education has countersigned the certificate, after having gone through the records, it is not possible for this Court to direct the Joint Director to reconsider the same, because, according to the learned counsel for the 3rd and the 4th respondents, the records are not available with them because of change in management. In such view of the matter, it is practicably impossible to verify as to whether the petitioner actually worked in the Department of Chemistry or in the Department of Bio-Chemistry.
7.In such view of the matter, no relief could be granted to the petitioner at this length of time. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Connected M.P.(MD)No.2 of 2010 is also dismissed.
To
1.The Teachers Recruitment Board, rep.by its Chairman, D.P.I.Compound, College Road, Chennai-600 006.
2.The Regional Director of Collegiate Education, Tirunelveli Region, Tirunelveli.