Madras High Court
R.Vinayagamoorthi vs The Chairman on 14 December, 2023
Author: R.Vijayakumar
Bench: R.Vijayakumar
W.P(MD).Nos.15349, 15440 and 16019 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
ORDER RESERVED ON : 07.12.2023
ORDER PRONOUNCED ON : 14.12.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
W.P.(MD).Nos.15349, 15440 and 16019 of 2022
and WMP(MD).Nos.10985, 10990 & 10987, 11070,
11074, 11072, 11575, 11576, 11578 & 11577 of 2022
and WMP(MD).No.5085 of 2023
WP(MD).No.15349 of 2022
R.Vinayagamoorthi ...Petitioner
Vs
The Chairman
Teachers Recruitment Board
4th Floor, EVK Sampath Maaligai
DPI Campus, College Road
Chennai 600 006 ...Respondent
WP(MD).No.15440 of 2022
1.C.Mathiyalagan
2.A.Dhanapal ...Petitioners
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
Represented by its Secretary
Department of Human Resources Management
Chennai-9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/17
W.P(MD).Nos.15349, 15440 and 16019 of 2022
2.Teachers Recruitment Board
Represented by its Chairman
4th Floor, EVK Sampath Maaligai
DPI Compound
College Road, Chennai 600 006
3.Teachers Recruitment Board
Represented by its Member Secretary
4th Floor, EVK Sampath Maaligai
DPI Compound
College Road
Chennai 600 006
4.The Commissioner of Technical Education
Directorate of Technical Education
Chennai 600 025
WP(MD).No.16019 of 2022
1.B.Dhandabani
2.D.Moganraj ...Petitioners
Vs
The Chairman
Teachers Recruitment Board
4th Floor, EVK Sampath Maaligai
DPI Campus, College Road
Chennai 600 006 ...Respondent
Prayer in WP(MD).No.15349 of 2022 : This Petition filed under Article 226
of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus,
calling for the entire records of the respondent pertaining to the impugned list
of candidates published on 08.07.2022 by the respondent, call for certificated
verification to be held from 16.07.2022 to 18.07.2022 or any other relating to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2/17
W.P(MD).Nos.15349, 15440 and 16019 of 2022
posts Lectures in Government Polytechnic Colleges and Special Institutions
(Engineering/Non Engineering) Service 2017-2018 by the respondent
Notification No.14/2019 published on 27.11.2019 so far as “ Mathematics”
subject under “person studied in tamil medium” (PSTM) category and quash
the same as illegal and direct the respondent to allow only the candidate those
who have completed their entire education ie.1st to 10th std, 12th std, degree
through tamil medium to avail PSTM quota including the petitioner for
certificate verification and proceed with the selection based such new list,
within the stipulated time period.
Prayer in WP(MD).No.15440 of 2022 : This Petition filed under Article 226
of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Declaration to declare the list
of short-listed candidates for certificate verification issued by the second
respondent pertaining to the Direct Recruitment for the post of Lecturers in
Government Polytechnic Colleges and Special Institutions
(Engineering/Non-Engineering) as illegal insofar as the PSTM category is
concerned and consequently for a direction, directing the respondent Nos.2
and 3 to revise the list of short-listed PSTM candidates by way of receiving
the PSTM certificate of the candidates right from 1st standard to SSLC, HSC,
UG Degree, B.Ed., Degree and PG Degree and by way of adopting the
enclosure I of the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.82 Human Resource
Management(S) Department dated 16.08.2021 and postpone the certificate
verification for the post of Lecturers in Government Polytechnic Colleges
and Special Institutions (Engineering/Non-Engineering).
Prayer in WP(MD).No.16019 of 2022 : This Petition filed under Article 226
of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus,
calling for the entire records of the respondent pertaining to the impugned list
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3/17
W.P(MD).Nos.15349, 15440 and 16019 of 2022
of candidates published on 08.07.2022 by the respondent, relating to posts
Lectures in Government Polytechnic Colleges and Special Institutions
(Engineering/Non Engineering) Service 2017-2018 by the respondent
Notification No.14/2019 published on 27.11.2019 so far as “ Mathematics”
subject under “person studied in tamil medium” (PSTM) category and quash
the same as illegal and direct the respondent to allow only the candidate those
who have completed their entire education ie.1st to 10th std, 12th std, degree
through tamil medium to avail PSTM quota including the petitioner for
certificate verification and proceed with the selection based such new list,
within the stipulated time period.
For Petitioners : Mr.G.Sakthi Rao
in WP.Nos.15349 & 16019 of 2022
: Mr.T.Aswin Rajasimman
For M/s.T.Lajapathi Roy
in WP.No.15440 of 2022
For Respondents : Mr.VR.Shanmuganathan
Standing Counsel
in WP.Nos.15349 & 16019 of 2022
:Mr.S.Shaji Bino
Special Government Pleader
for R1 & R4 in WP.No.15440 of 2022
: Mr.VR.Shanmuganathan
Standing Counsel for R2 & R3
in WP.No.15440 of 2022
COMMON ORDER
All these writ petitions have been filed by the aspirants to the post of Lecturers in Government Polytechnic Colleges who had applied pursuant to https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/17 W.P(MD).Nos.15349, 15440 and 16019 of 2022 notification issued by the Teachers Recruitment Board in Notification No. 14/2019 dated 27.11.2019 challenging the selection list published by the Teachers Recruitment Board wherein the selected candidates were called for certificate verification.
2(A).The background facts:
(i)The Government of Tamil Nadu promulgated Ordinance No.3 of 2010 titled as Tamil Nadu Appointment on preferential basis in the services under the State of persons studied in Tamil Medium Ordinance, 2010. The said Ordinance was notified under G.O.Ms.No.145, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (S) Department dated 30.09.2010. Under the said Ordinance, 20% of all the vacancies for appointment in the services under the State which are to be filled through direct recruitment shall be set apart on preferential basis to the persons studied in Tamil Medium.
(ii) Section 2(d) defines the persons studied in Tamil Medium in the State a way that the candidates should have acquired educational qualification prescribed for direct recruitment though Tamil Medium. In other words, it is enough that the basic qualification who was fixed as an eligibility for applying has been studied in Tamil Medium. The said Ordinance was replaced with Tamil Nadu Act 40 of 2010 which carry the same definition under Section 2(d).
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/17 W.P(MD).Nos.15349, 15440 and 16019 of 2022
(iii)The Tamil Nadu Government had issued Act 35 of 2020 wherein the definition of persons studied in Tamil Medium was amended to the effect that not only the prescribed educational qualification, but the entire qualification up to the prescribed qualification should have been studied in Tamil Medium.
(iv)The notification for Grade-I Services-2020 was challenged by one Mr.G.Sakthi Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP(MD).Nos.15349 and 16019 of 2002 on the ground that the notification does not point out that the candidate should have studied right from the 1st standard to the prescribed qualification in Tamil Medium. The said prayer was sought in W.P(MD).No. 8025 of 2020. The Hon'ble Division Bench was pleased to dispose of the writ petition on 22.03.2021 upholding Act 40 of 2010 and Act 35 of 2020. The Hon'ble Division Bench was pleased to issue a direction to the respondents to give 20% PSTM reservation only to those who studied their entire education through out in Tamil Medium namely right from 1st standard up to the prescribed qualification.
(v)A notification was issued by the Teachers Recruitment Board on 27.11.2019 in Notification No.14/2019 seeking for application for the post of Lecturers in Government Polytechnic Colleges for the year 2017-2018. In Clause-5(b)(ii), it was declared that 20% of PSTM reservation will be followed as per existing G.O.Ms.No.145 Personnel and Administrative https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/17 W.P(MD).Nos.15349, 15440 and 16019 of 2022 Reforms (S) Department dated 30.09.2010.
(vi)According to the petitioners, the said examinations were conducted on 18.12.2021 and 12.12.2021. The results were published on 13.07.2022. A list of successful candidates was published by TRB calling upon them to appear for certificate verification on 16.07.2022 and 18.07.2022. In the meanwhile, the Hon'ble Division Bench judgment was delivered on 22.03.2021. The Hon'ble Supreme Court had confirmed the order of the Division Bench in SLP(Civil).Nos.3364 and 3367 of 2022 on 31.07.2023.
(vii)The main contention of the petitioners is that PSTM reservation has been interpreted by the Hon'ble Division Bench to the effect that only those who have studied right from 1st standard from the prescribed qualification will be eligible to apply under the said category. This judgment was delivered on 22.02.2021. The results were published for the Notification No.14 of 2019 only on 13.07.2022. In compliance with the orders of the Hon'ble Division Bench, the Government had issued guidelines for availing PSTM under G.O.Ms.No.82 Human Resource Management(S) Department dated 16.08.2021. Therefore, the candidates who had already been short-listed based upon the original notification dated 27.11.2019 are not qualified and the said selection list should be set aside and the revised selection list should be published based upon the interpretation given by the Hon'ble Division Bench on 22.03.2021 and confirmed by the Hon'ble https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 7/17 W.P(MD).Nos.15349, 15440 and 16019 of 2022 Supreme Court on 31.07.2023. The above said writ petitions have been filed on 13.07.2022.
3(C).Contentions of the writ petitioners are as follows:
(i)The petitioners primarily relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP(Civil) Nos.3364-3367 of 2022 (S.Shriram Vs. G.Sakthi Rao & others) in paragraph Nos.10,11 and 12 has held as follows:
“10.When we look at the 2010 enactment in the above light, the amendment incorporated in the year 2020 has to be construed as nothing more than a clarificatory amendment of what was originally provided for in the 2010 Act. Some ambiguity remained in the interpretation of the term “ persons studied in Tamil Medium” as defined under Section 2(d). The amending Act of 2020 is only to ensure proper construction of Section 2(d) to achieve the objective of the Act so that only those who have pursued their education in Tamil Medium, would be entitled to compete for 20% of the jobs in the State earmarked for them.
11.Unless such an interpretation is given to the relevant section in the Tami Nadu Act No.40 of 2010 as amended in 2020, the Act would fail to fully achieve the legislative intent of the enactment.
12.The Amending Act by applying the rules of purposive interpretation, should be construed as an explanatory Act consistent with the objective of the Act No.40 of 2010. The impugned judgment of the High Court as can be noticed proceeds on this basis.
Therefore, we see no infirmity with the view taken by the Division https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 8/17 W.P(MD).Nos.15349, 15440 and 16019 of 2022 Bench in its declaration that the 20% reservation evisaged under the Tamil Nadu Appointment on Preferential Basis in the Services under the State of Persons studied in Tamil Medum Act, 2010 (Act No.40 of 2010) is available only to those who undertook their entire education only in the Tamil Medium ie. right from the first standard up to the prescribed qualification.”
(ii)The learned counsel for the petitioners had contended that as per judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the amendment in the year 2020 has to be construed as nothing more than a clarificatory amendment of what was originally provided for in the 2010 Act. The petitioners had further contended that when all the judgments are retrospective in nature, the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Division Bench would relate back to the date of enforcement of Tamil Nadu Act 40 of 2010.
(iii)In the light of the legal position, the notification issued by TRB is not valid with regard to PSTM and consequentially, the final list of candidates published for certificate verification should also be quashed.
(iv)The learned counsel for the petitioners had relied upon the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court to contend that all the judgments are retrospective in nature unless declared to be prospective in nature. Hence, they prayed for setting aside the final list of candidates called for certificate verification.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 9/17 W.P(MD).Nos.15349, 15440 and 16019 of 2022 4(D).Contentions of the learned counsel appearing for the respondents are as follows:
(i)The learned counsel appearing for the respondents had relied upon the following judgements of the learned Single Judges:
(a)The orders in W.P(MD).No.3302 of 2022 ( M.Prakash Vs. The Secretary, Department of Higher Education and another) dated 22.02.2022.
(b)W.P.No.1439 of 2022 (K.Gomathi Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu and others) dated 31.03.2022.
and contended that the aspirants under the same notification had challenged the selection process and they sought for a direction only those students who had completed their entire education through Tamil Medium could avail PSTM quota. The said prayer was rejected by the learned Single Judges. Therefore, for the same notification, some other candidates cannot be permitted to challenge the selection process on the same ground. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of the writ petitions.
5.I have considered the submissions made on either side and perused the material records.
E.Discussion:
6.The notification for the post of Lecturers in Polytechnic Colleges under Notification No.14 /2019 was issued by TRB on 27.11.2019. In Clause 5(b)(ii), it was specifically mentioned that they would follow PSTM quota as https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 10/17 W.P(MD).Nos.15349, 15440 and 16019 of 2022 per G.O.Ms.No.145 Personnel and Administrative Reforms (S) Department dated 30.09.2010. A plain reading of the said G.O clearly indicate that for claiming PSTM quota, it is enough that a candidate had studied in Tamil Nadu while acquiring prescribed qualification. It is not necessary to have studied in Tamil Medium in all Classes right from the 1st standard up to the prescribed qualification. Only on the said interpretation and understanding, the petitioners herein had applied for the posts. After last date of submissions of the application was over, Tamil Nadu Act 40 of 2010 was amended by Tamil Nadu Act 35 of 2020 with effect from 7th December 2020 wherein the criteria for availing PSTM was amended to the effect a candidate should have passed all the Classes through out his career up to the prescribed qualification in Tamil Medium.
7.The Division Bench had upheld the validity of Tamil Nadu Act 40 of 2010 and 35 of 2020 and clarified that PSTM quota can be availed only by the candidates who had studied from 1st standard to the prescribed qualification in Tamil Medium. The said judgment was delivered on 22.03.2021. Thereafter, the exams were held for the said post on 08.12.2021 and 12.12.2021. The results were published on 13.07.2022 in which the petitioners did not get selected. Thereafter, the Government issued the guidelines in G.O.Ms.No.82 Human Resource Management(S) Department dated 16.08.2021 clarifying the procedure to be followed for availing PSTM https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 11/17 W.P(MD).Nos.15349, 15440 and 16019 of 2022 quota. Therefore, it is clear that after the last date for submission of applications, the Division Bench judgment was delivered. The Government Order following the Division Bench Judgment was notified after the results were published for the examinations.
8.The Hon'ble Supreme Court was pleased to confirm the Division Bench judgment on 31.07.2023. However, the certificate verifications have been completed in July 2022 itself. The petitioners having accepted the interpretation of PSTM as per G.O.Ns.145 dated 30.09.2010 had applied for the post and the said interpretation prevailed till the last date of submission of applications. The petitioners have not chosen to challenge the notification or interpretation in the said notification till the results were published. Under Tamil Nadu Act 35 of 2020 was notified on 07.12.2020 which is in favour of the writ petitioner. However, they have not chosen to challenge either the notification or selection process till the results were published on 13.07.2022.
9.Though it is contended by the writ petitioners that all judgments are retrospective in nature and therefore, the judgement of the Hon'ble Division Bench though it is dated 22.03.2021 would affect the notification of the year 2019, these submissions may not be legally correct. Both under G.O.Ms.No. 145, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (S) Department dated 30.09.2010 and Tamil Nadu Act 40 of 2010, the interpretation for availing PSTM quota was not in favour of the writ petitioners. For the first time, through Tamil https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 12/17 W.P(MD).Nos.15349, 15440 and 16019 of 2022 Nadu Act 35 of 2020 dated 07.12.2020 such an explanation was offered through an amendment to Tamil Nadu Act 40 of 2010. Therefore, the right of the writ petitioners accrued only on 07.12.2020. By this time, the last date for submitting the application was over under the notification No.14 of 2019.
10.A learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P(MD).No.3302 of 2022 ( M.Prakash Vs. The Secretary, Department of Higher Education and another) dated 22.02.2022 while considering the same notification namely Notification No.14/2019 in paragraph Nos.5, 6 and 7 has held as follows:
“5. In case the petitioner raises a ground in respect of validity of the conditions imposed, that cannot be now adjudicated as the Scope of PSTM quota is further interpreted by the Hon'ble Division Bench, after issuance of impugned notification and based on that, the Teachers Recruitment Board also issued new conditions for PSTM quota in the recent recruitment notification dated 21.10.2021. Therefore, the notification of the year 2019 cannot be challenged based on subsequent developments and changes made in the policy.
6. It is consistently held by the Courts across the country that once the recruitment notification is issued and the candidates participated in the process of selection, they cannot turn around and challenge the conditions in the notification. If at all any selection is made contrary to the terms and conditions of the Notification, the same alone would provide cause for aggrieved persons to move the Court of law, but not otherwise.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 13/17 W.P(MD).Nos.15349, 15440 and 16019 of 2022
7. This being the scope of the writ petition, the notification of the year 2019 cannot be now challenged in the year 2022 and after completion of process of selection, if any violations are noticed, then the aggrieved persons are at liberty to approach the Court of law. Thus, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.”
11.Another learned Single Judge of this Court in a judgment reported in W.P.No.1439 of 2022 (K.Gomathi Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu and others) in paragraph No.7 has held as follows:
“7. A Division Bench of this Court has also observed in W.A.No.1481 of 2021 and CMP.No.9429 of 2021 dated 17.11.2021 that, “7.14. the changes brought out in the qualification norms by the way of the subsequent Government Order viz., G.O.(Ms.)No.361, dated 31.12.1999 has to be applied prospectively and cannot be allowed to take retrospective effect.” In the case on hand, the notification is of the year 2019 and the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.82, Human Resource Development (S) Department is dated 16.08.2021 and it cannot be given retrospective operation in the light of the Division Bench judgment of this Court cited supra. The notification of the year 2019, cannot be now challenged in the year 2022, after a delay of three years. It is the stand of the third respondent in the counter affidavit that examinations are over and the results are yet to be published and therefore, amending https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 14/17 W.P(MD).Nos.15349, 15440 and 16019 of 2022 the notification in the midway of the recruitment process cannot be accepted in the light of the Division Bench decision cited supra.”
12.In view of the judgments of the two learned Judges who had an occasion to consider the challenge to the Notification No.14 of 2019 on similar grounds and having arrived at a finding that a notification of the year 2019 cannot be challenged in the year 2020 after a delay of three years, this Court is of the considered opinion that the same notification cannot be challenged through other candidates who had not ventured to do so at an earlier point of time. Admittedly, when Tamil Nadu Act 35 of 2020 was notified recruited process was in the mid-way. Therefore, viewed from any angle, the prayer of the petitioners for setting aside the final list calling for certificate verification is not legally sustainable.
13.In view of the above said facts, there are no merits in the writ petitions. All the writ petitions stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
14.12.2023
Internet : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
NCC : Yes/No
msa
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
15/17
W.P(MD).Nos.15349, 15440 and 16019 of 2022
To
1.The Secretary
State of Tamil Nadu
Department of Human Resources Management
Chennai-9
2.The Commissioner of Technical Education
Directorate of Technical Education
Chennai 600 025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
16/17
W.P(MD).Nos.15349, 15440 and 16019 of 2022
R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.
msa
Pre-delivery common order made in
W.P.(MD).Nos.15349, 15440 and 16019 of 2022
and WMP(MD).Nos.10985, 10990 & 10987, 11070,
11074, 11072, 11575, 11576, 11578 & 11577 of 2022 and WMP(MD).No.5085 of 2023 14.12.2023 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 17/17