Madras High Court
V.Saravanan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 6 November, 2024
Author: S.S. Sundar
Bench: S.S. Sundar, Mohammed Shaffiq
Rev.Appl.No.158 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 06.11.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SUNDAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
Rev.Appl.No.158 of 2023
V.Saravanan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
Represented by its Secretary to Government,
School Education Department,
Secretariat, Fort St. George,
Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Director of School Education,
DPI Campus, College Road,
Chennai – 600 006.
3.The Member Secretary,
Teacher Recruitment Board,
4th Floor, EVK Sampath Maligai,
DPI Campus, College Road,
Chennai – 600 006. ... Respondent
Page 1
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Rev.Appl.No.158 of 2023
Prayer : Review Application filed under Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section
114 of Code of Civil Procedure to review the order dated 31.03.2023 made
in W.A.No.1783 of 2021 on the file of this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Sankaran
Senior Counsel
for Mr.S.Nedunchezhiyan
For R1 and R2 : Mr.R.Neelakandan
Additional Advocate General-VIII
assisted by Mr.J.C.Durairaj
Additional Government Pleader
For R3 : Mr.K.Sathish Kumar
Standing Counsel for TRB
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.S. SUNDAR, J.)
This Review Application is directed against the order of Division
Bench of this Court dated 31.03.2023 in W.A.No.1783 of 2021, allowing the
Writ Appeal filed by the respondents in the writ petition.
Page 2
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2.The review petitioner challenged the proceedings of the Teachers
Recruitment Board dated 17.10.2019, in W.P.No.30838 of 2019, alleging
that the petitioner is entitled to get marks for Question Nos.27 and 82. As
regards Q.No.27, it was contended before the learned Single Judge that the
Expert Committee has pointed out that the constant value of Bohr Magneton
is not correct, but the Committee has explained that a candidate was
supposed to substitute the given value to choose the correct answer, which is
Option 'A'. This was not accepted by the learned Single Judge for the
following reasons :
“11.There are two questions namely Question No.27
and Question No.82 that have been put to challenge with
regard to the options given for those questions. Insofar as
Question No.27 is concerned, the Expert Committee itself has
stated that the constant value of Bohr mageton is not correct,
which would mean that the question itself is not correct. The
Expert Committee has opined that the candidates are
expected to substitute the given value “which was found not
to be correct” and choose Option “A”. This would mean that
the candidate has to rewrite the question and thereafter,
Page 3
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
choose Option “A”. Such an exercise can never be done by a
candidate and candidate can only choose the option for a
given question and he cannot re-frame a question. Therefore,
the opinion given by the Expert is not acceptable and mark
has to be necessarily given to the petitioner for Question
No.27.”
3.Against the order of the learned Single Judge, the State preferred an
appeal in W.A.No.1783 of 2021. The Division Bench of this Court allowed
the Writ Appeal by judgment dated 31.03.2023, against which, the above
Review Application is filed by the writ petitioner.
4.This Court examined the Question No.27 and the view of the Expert.
First of all, it is seen that the petitioner has presumed the question different
from what it means. The question reads as follows :
“27.For Nickel the number density is 8 x 10 23 atoms/cm3 and
electronic configuration is 1s2 2s2 2p6 3s2 3p6 3d8 4s2. The value
of the saturation magnetization of Nickel in its ferromagnetic
state is : (Given Bohr magneton ?B = 9.21 x 10-21 Am2, magnetic
dipole moment of Ni is 0.6)
(A) 4.42 x 109 A/m (B) 6.42 x 10-9 A/m
Page 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
(C) 9.21 x 10-21 A/m (D) 8 x 1023 A/m2
epf;fYf;fhd vz; mlh;j;jp 8 x 1023 mQqf;fs; - br/kP 3
kw;Wk; mjd; kpd;dQq fl;likg;g[ 1s2 2s2 2p6 3s2 3p6 3d8
4s2 vdpy; `bgnuhfhe;j epiyapy; epf;fypd;
brwpt{l;lg;gl;l fhe;jnkw;wj;jpd; kjpg;g[ :
(nghh;khf;dl;lhd; ?B = 9.21 x 10 -21 Am2 MkP 2
epf;fypd;
fhe;j ,UKidthf;fy; kjpg;g[ 0/6 vd;f)
(A) 4.42 x 109 M-kP (B) 6.42 x 10-9 M-kP
(C) 9.21 x 10-21 M-kP 2
(D) 8 x 1023 M-kP 2”
5.The value of Bohr Magneton is given. Therefore, the candidate was
expected to presume the value of Bohr Magneton as it was given in the
question. It is not in dispute that, when the value is taken as suggested in
the question, the correct answer is Option 'A'. In such circumstances, this
Court is unable to sustain the view expressed by the learned Single Judge.
6.It is not in dispute that the petitioner, to succeed in the writ petition,
has to get two marks. In other words, the petitioner has secured 76 marks
and unless he secures 78 marks, he may not be within the zone of
Page 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
consideration. In such circumstances, this Court finds no reason to entertain
this review application.
7.Accordingly, this Review Application is dismissed. No costs.
(S.S.S.R., J.) (M.S.Q., J.)
06.11.2024
mkn
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes
Neutral Citation : Yes
To
1.The Secretary to Government,
State of Tamil Nadu,
School Education Department,
Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Director of School Education,
DPI Campus, College Road,
Chennai – 600 006.
3.The Member Secretary,
Teacher Recruitment Board,
4th Floor, EVK Sampath Maligai,
DPI Campus, College Road,
Chennai – 600 006.
Page 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.S. SUNDAR, J.
and
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
mkn
06.11.2024
Page 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
