WP/31909/2019 of S.Sarangapani Vs The Chairman on 7 October 2026

ORDER

The Petitioners by the present Writ Petition have sought for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to select the Petitioners as Drawing Teachers in the quota reserved for candidates who have studied under PSTM (Persons studied in Tamil Medium) based on the marks secured by the Petitioners in the process of selection and as per the rule of Reservation prescribed in the Notification No.05/2017 dated 26.07.2017.

2. Heard Mr.S.Arokiya Mani Raj, learned counsel for the Petitioners; Mr.R.Siddharth, learned Standing Counsel for the 1st Respondent and Ms.P.Kalpa Reddy, learned Special Government Pleader for the 2nd Respondent and perused the materials available on record.

3. The case of the Petitioners is that the 1st Respondent had issued the Notification No.05/2017 dated 26.07.2017 inviting applications from the eligible candidates for direct recruitment of Special Teachers (Physical Education, Music, Drawing, Sewing) in School Education and other Departments for the years 2012 to 2016; that the 1st Respondent by the said Notification, sought to fill up 1,325 posts of Special Teachers; that insofar as the Special Teacher (Drawing) is concerned, the total number of vacancies that were sought to be filled up were 310; that the said recruitment to be undertaken by applying both Vertical and Horizontal Reservations as specified in the Notification; that as per the said Notification, 6 posts of Drawing Teachers were reserved under the category SC GT (Scheduled Caste General Turn) and 1 post of Special Teacher (Drawing) was reserved under the category SC GT Ex* (Scheduled Caste General Turn Ex-Serviceman); that the Notification also provided for Horizontal Reservation for the Persons Studied in Tamil Medium (PSTM) to an extent of 20% on preferential basis; that as the 1st Petitioner belongs to SC category and also having pursued his studies in Tamil Medium, he had applied for the said post under Vertical Reservation i.e., Scheduled Caste and also claimed Horizontal Reservation under PSTM; that the 2nd Petitioner had also applied in respect of vacancies reserved for candidate belonging to MBC GT and claimed Horizontal reservation under PSTM category; that the Petitioners had appeared for written examination held on 23.09.2017; that as no candidate was available to be appointed against the reserved communal turn for SC GT Ex vacancy i.e., Ex-Serviceman vacancy, the 1st Respondent thereafter had issued the Call Letter dated 21.10.2017 to the 1st Petitioner directing him to appear for Certificate Verification against the vacancy which is reserved for SC GT Ex* category, by calling the candidates under the ratio of 1:2; and that despite Petitioners secured marks more than the selected candidate, Petitioners have not been appointed against the said vacancy.

4. Counter Affidavit and Additional Counter Affidavit have been filed by the 1st Respondent.

4.1. The 1st Respondent by the Counter Affidavit contended that in the written examination held on 23.09.2019, 1st Petitioner secured 46 marks while the 2nd Petitioner secured 52 marks; that the 1st issued Call Letter to Petitioner for Certificate Verification on 23.01.2021 against the vacancy reserved under SC GT Ex* & MBC/DNC GT category respectively, as no suitable/eligible candidate under Ex-Servicemen category was available, the said post was sought to be filled up by the candidate belongs to the category other than the Ex-Servicemen; that the 1st Petitioner secured 51 marks (46 marks in the Written Examination + 5 marks awarded as Weightage Marks during Certificate Verification); that the 2nd Petitioner secured 57 marks (52 marks in the Written Examination + 5 marks awarded as Weightage Marks during Certificate

Verification); that the eligible cut-off marks for MBC/DNC GT category and SC GT category as per the revised provisional selection list is 59 marks & 63 marks respectively; and that as the Petitioners did not secure the eligible cut-off mark under the respective category, the have not considered for selection.

4.2. It is further contended by the 1st Respondent that one vacancy which is reserved for Ex-Serviceman remained unfilled, due to non availability of eligible candidate and similarly, one vacancy under MBC/DNC category has been kept unfilled on account of the present writ petition filed by the Petitioners; that there are more meritorious candidates who had secured higher marks than the Petitioners, would otherwise be eligible for being appointed against the said vacancies and Petitioners cannot claim as a matter of right to be appointed against the said vacancy.

4.3. The 1st Respondent has filed the Additional Counter Affidavit on 30.01.2026 stating that it had strictly followed the recruitment rules in force including providing for Vertical & Horizontal Reservation as ordered by the Government for communal reservations as per the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016; that the Respondent while drawing revised provisional selection list dated 23.01.2025 for the post of Special Teacher (Drawing) had placed all the meritorious candidates irrespective of their communities from the merit list against the General Turn Vacancy; that after completion of selection to General Turn, 131 candidates were considered for selection against the communal turns earmarked for each of the category; that among the said candidates, 43 meritorious candidates from the eligible communal turn were found eligible as per the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016 as per the orders of this Court as well as the Hon’ble Supreme Court regarding recruitment; that the Respondent while filling up the vacancies for communal turn had followed the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Indra Sawhney Vs. Union of India reported in 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217 and applied the principle what is otherwise called as interlocking reservations as considered therein; that the Respondent had drawn up a revised provisional selection list on 23.01.2025 and published the same on the 1st Respondent’s website on 06.02.2025; that even after redrawing the selection list, the merit of the selected candidates did not get affected even though they are selected in Horizontal Reservations; that as per the revised provisional selection list, the last candidate who was selected in SC communal turn & MBC category had secured 63 marks and 62 marks, while the 1st Petitioner secured 51 marks and the 2nd Petitioner secured 57 marks which are below the cut-off marks of the candidates who were selected under the respective communal turns.

4.4. The 1st Respondent by submitting as above, contended that since, the 1st Petitioner did not reach the selection cut-off marks, he will not got selected even in the revised provisional selection list published in the 1st Respondent’s website on 06.02.2025. The 1st Respondent also contended that even the 2nd Respondent did not secure marks above the cut off marks for including him for the post of Drawing Teacher. Thus, 1st Respondent seeks for dismissal of this Writ Petition.

5. I have taken note of the contentions of the Petitioners as well as the 1st Respondent.

6. Though the Petitioners have filed the present Writ Petition for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to appoint them to the post of Special Teacher (Drawing) against the vacancies reserved under the category of PSTM candidates by applying Vertical and Horizontal Reservation, admittedly, Petitioners secured less marks than the candidates who were selected and appointed by applying both the Vertical and Horizontal Reservation. The selected candidates having secured 63/62 marks while the Petitioners secured only 51 & 57 marks respectively, the Petitioners cannot claim that candidates who have secured less marks than the Petitioners having been appointed against the post which are reserved to be filled up by applying communal rotation.

7. The Petitioners laid their case on the ground that 1st Respondent having issued the Call Letter dated 21.10.2017 to appear for Certificate

Verification in respect of the vacancy reserved for Ex-Servicemen SC GT Ex* in absence of suitable candidate being available in the said category which is otherwise required to be filled up by a candidate the Ex-Serviceman category is sought to be filled up by the candidates from the category of General Turn, the Petitioners would stand among the similarly placed candidates who’s candidature is to be considered on the basis of marks secured by them

8. Further, the details of the selected candidates as placed on record by the 1st Respondent in the Additional Counter Affidavit filed before this Court shows that no candidate who had secured less marks than the Petitioners have been appointed against the vacancy either reserved on communal turn basis to candidate belonging to SC GT / MBC GT or the vacancy of SC GT Ex*, in the absence of any eligible Ex-Servicemen to be selected, the said vacancy being filled up by bringing the same into general pool.

9. As is evident from the details placed on record by the 1st Respondent, the cut-off marks for SC GT / MBC GT category being 63/62 marks. The Petitioners who secured only 51 & 57 marks cannot seek for issuance of writ of mandamus to the Respondents to appoint them, ignoring the other candidates who had secured higher marks than the Petitioners ranging between 54 to 61 marks, as per the revised provisional selection list which was published on the 1st Respondent’s website on 06.02.2025.

10. Thus, this Court is of the considered view that the claim being made by the Petitioners to be appointed against the said vacancy merely on the basis of being issued with Call Letter for Certificate Verification, cannot be accepted as valid claim for it to be sustained.

11. Accordingly, this Writ Petition fails and is dismissed as devoid of merits. However, there shall be no order as to costs. 07-10-2026 mrr Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking Order Neutral Citation: Yes/No To

1. The Chairman, Teachers Recruitment Board, 4th Floor, EVK Sampath Maligai, College Road, Chennai – 6.

2. The Secretary, School Education Department, Fort St.George, Chennai – 9.

3. The Director of Government Examination, College Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 6.

T.VINOD KUMAR, J. mrr Pre-Delivery Order in W.P.No.31909 of 2019 07-10-2026