Madras High Court
S.Arivuselvan vs Tamil Nadu Public Service ... on 13 October, 2022
W.P.No.3203 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 13.10.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
W.P.No.3203 of 2021
and
W.M.P.No.4805 of 2021
S.Arivuselvan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission,
Rep. by the Secretary,
TNPSC Road,
VOC Nagar, Park Town,
Chennai.
2.The Commissioner,
Department of Archaeology,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Tamil Valarchi Valaagam,
Tamil Salai,
Chennai - 600 008.
3.K.Vasanthakumar
4.M.Suresh
5.R.Subhashini ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for
1/15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.3203 of 2021
records pertaining to the order Na.Ka.No.A1/6922/2014 dated 23.01.2021
read with the Selection Notification dated 16.12.2020 issued by the 1st
respondent, Quash the same to the extent they have selected and appointed
the respondents 3 to 5 as invalid and consequently direct the respondents to
select the petitioner to the post of Archaeological Officer under the MBC
category with all consequential benefits pursuant to the Advertisement
No.563 Notification No.33/2019 dated 28.11.2019 issued by the 1st
respondent.
For Petitioner : Ms.S.Meenakshi
For Respondents : Mr.Karthikrajan
Standing Counsel
for R1
Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal
Additional Government Pleader
for R2
Mr.C.K.Chandrasekkar
for R3 to R5
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the selection notification
dated 16.12.2020 under which the private respondents have been declared to
be selected. The petitioner has challenged the impugned selection list on the
ground that the private respondents have not studied Tamil as one of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.3203 of 2021
subjects in Degree course, which is a mandatory educational qualification
required for getting selected to the post of Archaeological Officer in the
Archaeology Department of the Government of Tamil Nadu.
2. According to the petitioner, the respective private respondents have
not studied Tamil as a language paper in their respective Degrees and
therefore, they are ineligible to get selected as Archaeological Officer in the
Archaeology Department as per the notification issued by the respondents
inviting candidates for selection.
3. A Counter Affidavit has been filed by the Tamil Nadu Public
Service Commission viz., the first respondent herein denying the allegations
of the petitioner. They would submit that the private respondents have
satisfied the educational requirements for being appointed as Archaeological
Officers as per the notification, as their medium of instruction in the
graduation level was Tamil.
4. The private respondents have also filed their separate counters
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.3203 of 2021
before this Court, denying the contention of the petitioner and in particular,
they have highlighted the courses contained in the paper 'Art' through Tamil
Literature in paragraph No.9 which is extracted hereunder:
1998 to 2014
2013 (Non onwards
Sl.No. Syllabus
Semester (Semester
Pattern) Pattern)
1 Nedunelvaadai Lines 72 - 130 Art Tamil I
Through BTA/BTS/
Tamil BTP
Literature 1:1:01
(TZD)
2 Maduraikanchi Lines 351-370
3 Pattinapalai Lines 142 - 157
4 Pari Paadal Verses on Sevvel & Tamil II
Thirumaal BTA/BTS/
5 Silappathigaram Kunrak Kurvak,Vettava BTP
Vari, Aranketruk Khaadai 2:1:08
6 Naalayira Divya Periyazhvar Pasurangal
Prabandam
7 Thevaarathil Appar Descriptions of different Tamil III
Pasurangal temples and special features BTA/BTS/
of Murthys BTP
8 Periya Puranam Sivamoorthangal 3:1:15
9 Kalingathuparani Natarajar, Bichadanar,
Arthanaareswara,
Somaskandhar,
Kalasambara,
Dakshinamoorthi,
Sandikeswarar, Possalar
10 Kambha Ramayanam Verse No.1 Tamil IV
Negerappadalam 13, 19, 23 BTA/BTS/
- 30 BTP
11 Seevagasindhamani Kaanthruvaththal ayar 4:1:22
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.3203 of 2021
1998 to 2014
2013 (Non onwards
Sl.No. Syllabus
Semester (Semester
Pattern) Pattern)
Illambhagam Verse 590-295
12 Thanigaipuranam A scene of Agathiyar's
getting Arul, 16 Dhiyaana
slokaas of Lord Subramania
5. They have also stated that their medium of instruction was only in
Tamil and therefore, they would contend that they have satisfied the
educational qualification required for appointment and further, they would
submit that having secured higher marks than the petitioner, the first
respondent Commission has duly selected them for the invited posts and
therefore, there is no illegality in the selection.
6. Heard Ms.S.Meenakshi, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr.Karthikrajan, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1,
Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal, learned Additional Government Pleader for
respondent No.2 and Mr.C.K.Chandrasekkar, learned counsel for the private
respondent Nos.3 to 5.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.3203 of 2021
Court to the following:
a) RTI Application sent by the petitioner dated 19.01.2021;
b) RTI Application sent by Mr.John Juvan dated 19.01.2021;
c) RTI Reply dated 05.02.2021.
8. After referring to the aforementioned documents / orders, learned
counsel for the petitioner would submit that as per the RTI reply, it is clear
that the Government College of Architecture and Sculpture at
Mahabalipuram where the private respondents did their graduation did not
have Tamil language as part of their curriculum. Therefore, learned counsel
for the petitioner would submit that the private respondents are not qualified
to get appointed as per the notification issued by the first respondent inviting
applications for the said posts.
9. The learned counsel for the petitioner also drew the attention of this
Court to the following:
a) Mark statement of the petitioner issued by the Tamil Nadu Music
and Fine Arts University;
b) Notification dated 28.11.2019 issued by the Tamil Nadu Public
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.3203 of 2021
Service Commission.
10. Referring to the aforementioned documents, she would submit
that the petitioner in his graduation has studied Tamil as a separate language
paper, whereas the same has not been studied by the respective private
respondents. She would also submit that the notification dated 28.11.2019
issued by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission makes it clear that a
candidate must have passed Tamil as one of the subjects in Degree level. She
would also submit that the respective private respondents have also not
produced any equivalence certificate with regard to their Degrees i.e., they
have not satisfied the first respondent Commission with the Degrees which
they have studied in Tamil medium are equivalent to the educational
qualification sought for by the Commission under its notification dated
28.11.2019.
11. The learned counsel for the petitioner also drew the attention of
this Court to a Judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of
Zonal Manager, Bank of India, Zonal Office, Kochi and others Vs.
Aarya K.Babu and Another reported in 2019 (8) SCC 587 in support of her
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.3203 of 2021
contention that the private respondents ought to have produced the
equivalence certificate in order to make them eligible for getting selected to
the subject posts.
12. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the first
respondent would reiterate the contents of the Counter Affidavit filed by the
first respondent before this Court and would submit that only in accordance
with the notification, the respective private respondents have been found
eligible for getting selected to the subject posts. It is also submitted that the
respective private respondents have also secured higher marks than the
petitioner.
13. The learned counsel appearing for the private respondents would
submit that the private respondents had completed their entire course of
study only in Tamil medium and they have also studied specialized subjects
in Tamil Literature, as highlighted in paragraph No.9 of their Counter
Affidavit. He would also submit that the educational qualification eligibility
does not specifically stipulate that a candidate must have studied Tamil as a
language. According to him, having studied the entire course of study in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.3203 of 2021
Tamil medium and having studied specialized subjects in Tamil Literature,
the objections raised by the petitioner is unsustainable. He also drew the
attention of this Court to the selection notification and would submit that the
private respondents have secured higher marks than the petitioner and
therefore, the impugned selection list has been rightly issued by the first
respondent / Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission.
14. Admittedly, the respective private respondents have studied their
graduation with the medium of instruction as Tamil. They have also studied
specialized subjects in Tamil Literature which are as follows:
1998 to 2014
2013 (Non onwards
Sl.No. Syllabus
Semester (Semester
Pattern) Pattern)
1 Nedunelvaadai Lines 72 - 130 Art Tamil I
Through BTA/BTS
Tamil /BTP
Literature 1:1:01
(TZD)
2 Maduraikanchi Lines 351-370
3 Pattinapalai Lines 142 - 157
4 Pari Paadal Verses on Sevvel & Tamil II
Thirumaal BTA/BTS
5 Silappathigaram Kunrak Kurvak,Vettava Vari, /BTP
Aranketruk Khaadai 2:1:08
6 Naalayira Divya Periyazhvar Pasurangal
Prabandam
7 Thevaarathil Appar Descriptions of different Tamil III
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.3203 of 2021
1998 to 2014
2013 (Non onwards
Sl.No. Syllabus
Semester (Semester
Pattern) Pattern)
Pasurangal temples and special features BTA/BTS
of Murthys /BTP
8 Periya Puranam Sivamoorthangal 3:1:15
9 Kalingathuparani Natarajar, Bichadanar,
Arthanaareswara,
Somaskandhar, Kalasambara,
Dakshinamoorthi,
Sandikeswarar, Possalar
10 Kambha Verse No.1 Negerappadalam Tamil IV
Ramayanam 13, 19, 23 - 30 BTA/BTS
11 Seevagasindhamani Kaanthruvaththal ayar /BTP
Illambhagam Verse 590-295 4:1:22
12 Thanigaipuranam A scene of Agathiyar's getting
Arul, 16 Dhiyaana slokaas of
Lord Subramania
15. The Educational qualification requirement as per the notification
dated 28.11.2019 is extracted hereunder:
i) Must possess M.A.Degree in Ancient
History and Archaeology or in Archaeology
(OR)
Must possess M.A.Degree in History or
Indian History or in Tamil awarded by any of the
University recognized by the University Grants
Commission and A 'Post Graduate Diploma in
Epigraphy and Archaeology' awarded by the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.3203 of 2021
institute of Epigraphy, Department of
Archaeology, Government of Tamil Nadu or Post
Graduate Diploma in Archaeology awarded by
the Archaeological Survey of India.
ii) Must have passed Tamil as one of the
subjects in Degree level.
16. As seen from the educational qualification requirement, a
candidate must have passed Tamil as one of the subjects in Degree level. It
does not stipulate that Tamil language must have been a subject in the
Degree level. The respective private respondents have studied their Degree
level with medium of instruction as Tamil. They have also studied
specialized subjects in Tamil Literature as observed earlier. Therefore, it
cannot be said that the private respondents have not passed Tamil as one of
the subjects in Degree level. The question of production of equivalence
certificate by the private respondents will also not arise as their medium of
instruction in their graduate study was only Tamil and that too when they
have studied specialized subjects in Tamil literature only in Tamil.
17. The private respondents having studied the entire Degree level
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.3203 of 2021
with medium of instruction as Tamil and having studied specialized subjects
in Tamil Literature, there was no necessity for the first respondent
Commission to ask the respective private respondents for an equivalence
certificate. The respective private respondents have also secured higher
marks than the petitioner, which is also not in dispute.
18. Out of the three private respondents, one of them is a woman who
had applied under the womens' category. The remaining two private
respondents have applied under the MBC category. The petitioner is a male,
therefore, the question of challenging the appointment of a woman in this
Writ Petition will also not arise. In so far as the remaining two private
respondents are concerned, they have admittedly secured higher marks than
the petitioner and were eligible to apply for the post. In view of the
observations made by this Court in the earlier paragraphs, their selections
also cannot be questioned by the petitioner.
19. The decision relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner
reported in 2019 (8) SCC 587 referred to supra does not aid the petitioner,
in view of the fact that there is no requirement for the private respondents to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.3203 of 2021
produce equivalence certificate in respect of their educational qualification as
they have done Degree level with medium of instruction as Tamil and have
also studied specialized subjects in Tamil Literature only in Tamil.
20. For the foregoing reasons, this Court does not find any merit in
this Writ Petition. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is Dismissed. No Costs.
Consequently, connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
13.10.2022
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order : Yes / No
ab
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.3203 of 2021
To
1.Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission,
Rep. by the Secretary,
TNPSC Road,
VOC Nagar, Park Town,
Chennai.
2.The Commissioner,
Department of Archaeology,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Tamil Valarchi Valaagam,
Tamil Salai,
Chennai - 600 008.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.3203 of 2021
ABDUL QUDDHOSE. J.,
ab
W.P.No.3203 of 2021
13.10.2022
(1/2)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
