Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

The Tamil Nadu Uniform Service Recruitment Board had notified recruitment of 1100 Sub Inspect of Police for the year 1994-1995, in which 80% of posts to be filled up under direct recruitment quota and 20% under departmental quota. Though the recruitment board TNUSRB had notified the recruitment of 1100 Sub Inspectors, however the Board had selected 1198 candidates, and these candidates underwent all the tests, including medical test and police verification. The 98 candidates, who were in excess of the notified vacancies, namely 1100 were not given appointment order and sent for training, of these 98 candidates, 73 people filed O.A. in the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal seeking appointment order but the learned Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal dismissed their O.As with the observation that the candidate who have secured equal marks as those already given appointment but denied appointment on the sole ground that they were Junior in age may be considered for appointment. Accordingly, the Government of Tamil Nadu took up the matter for consideration of their cases.

5. These 98 candidates shall be subject to police verification again. Their seniority will be reckoned by placing them below the 1000 Sub Inspectors of Police candidate selected during the 1997-98 recruitment. They will be sent for training in May 2000 alongwith the second batch of Sub-Inspectors candidates selected during the 1997-1998 recruitment."

3. The case of the petitioner herein is, though the petitioner had also secured the cut off marks of 65, they were not selected by the TNUSRB due to want of vacancies. Since some of the selected candidates also secured 65 marks and the petitioners also secured 65 marks, but not selected, the petitioner filed OA.6140/1997, before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal but the Tribunal dismissed the same. Aggrieved by the order the present writ petitioner Mr.Y.Yesu Chandra Bose in WP.No.11057 of 2009 had filed the writ petition No.15843/1999 against the order of the TAT. This court while dismissing the above said writ petition made an observation as follows:

"In view of what is stated above we don't think that the Tribunal is in error in rejecting the original application filed by the applicant. It is left to the authorities to consider the claim of the writ petitioner if there is still any post available and if he satisfies the requirements."

4. Thereafter, the petitioner made a representation on the basis of the observation made by this court. Accordingly, the Chairman of the TNUSRB has informed that in the light of the order of the High Court that the applicant's claim may be considered and orders be issued. Accordingly, Y.Yesu Chandra Bose for appointment as Sub Inspector of Police under 20% departmental quota of 1994-1995 has been considered. It is further seen that in the waiting list of candidates provided by the Chairman, TNUSRB, Mr.Y.Yesu Chandra Bose is the sixth one, out of seven BC candidates, who secured equal marks, candidates could not be given appointment for want of vacancy. The gradation given to the abovesaid 7 candidates is as follows :-

7.The Director General of Police is requested to send separate proposal for relaxation of age rule in individual cases, Wherever necessary."

8. Heard the counsel appearing on either side and perused the records.

9. The respondents have admittedly appointed 80% of directly recruited candidates, who are constituting 1100 candidates and 20% of in-service candidates, who are constituting 270 candidates. Wjile again appointing additional 98 candidates, it is admittedly conceded that the Government have not followed 80:20 ratio in filling all 98 vacancies. The G.O.1281, dated 12.09.1999 also clearly says that the Government by giving relaxation of age, communal rotations, sports quota and 30% reservation for women PC's have failed to consider granting 20% reservation to the inservice candidates. Therefore, as rightly contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner if the respondents TNUSRB properly applied 80:20 ratio in filling up all 98 additional vacancies, the petitioners, namely Y.Yesu Chandra Bose and Ayyasamy could have easily got appointed as they have also obtained the cut off marks 65, which was applied for selection to the post of Sub Inspector in the year 1994-1995. This aspect was not properly taken note of by all concerned and if I put it rightly, the respondents have adroitly and skillfully withheld the information in all the earlier proceedings, which culminated into writ petitions and O.A. before the Tribunal.