Madras High Court
The Tamil Nadu Public Service ... vs M.Kavin Kumar on 25 June, 2025
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam
2025:MHC:1470
W.A.(MD) Nos.555 & 556 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 25.06.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
and
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE
W.A.(MD) Nos.555 & 556 of 2020
and
C.M.P.(MD) Nos.3778 & 3782 of 2020
W.A.(MD) No.555 of 2020:
The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission
rep.by its Secretary
Park Town, V.O.C.Nagar
Chennai-600 003 ... Appellant
-vs-
1.M.Kavin Kumar
2.The Director of Horticulture
and Plantation Crops
Office of the Director of Horticulture
and Plantation Crops
Chepauk, Chennai-5 ... Respondents
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the
order, dated 27.04.2019, passed in W.P.(MD) No.22006 of 2018, on the file of
this Court.
____________
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/06/2025 04:41:41 pm )
W.A.(MD) Nos.555 & 556 of 2020
For Appellant : Mr.V.Panneerselvam
Standing Counsel
For Respondents : Mr.G.Karthick
for M/s.T.Lajapathi Roy & Associates for R1
Mr.V.Om Prakash
Government Advocate for R2
W.A.(MD) No.556 of 2020:
The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission
rep.by its Secretary
Park Town, V.O.C.Nagar
Chennai-600 003 ... Appellant
-vs-
R.Uma Maheswari ... Respondent
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the
order, dated 27.04.2019, passed in W.P.(MD) No.22055 of 2018, on the file of
this Court.
For Appellant : Mr.V.Panneerselvam
Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.G.Karthick
for M/s.T.Lajapathi Roy & Associates
____________
Page 2 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/06/2025 04:41:41 pm )
W.A.(MD) Nos.555 & 556 of 2020
COMMON JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.]
Courts have considered the legal issue that condonable mistakes
can be condoned and uncondonable mistakes cannot be condoned. Errors
trivial in nature in the application made by the candidate can be rectified and
it may not form a ground for rejection of the candidature. But, if the errors
are substantial or part of the selection process, such errors cannot be
permitted to be rectified and the same are to be construed as uncondonable
mistakes. In the event of condoning the uncondonable mistakes, it will result
in infringing the rights of several other candidates participated in the selection
process. Thus, the Courts, in exercise of the power of judicial review, cannot
condone the uncondonable errors made by the candidates in their
applications.
2. Let us now consider the rule governing the selection process
notified in the recruitment notification. Para 2(10) of the “Instructions to the
Applicants” reads as under:
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/06/2025 04:41:41 pm )
W.A.(MD) Nos.555 & 556 of 2020
““Please note that all the particulars mentioned in the
online application including Name of the applicant, Post
applied for, Communal category, Date of Birth, Address,
e-mail ID, Centre of Examination etc., will be considered
as final”. However, applicants can modify certain fields
till the last date specified for applying online. Certain
fields are fixed and cannot be edited even before the
closing date. Applicants are hence requested to fill in
the online application form with utmost care as no
correspondence regarding change of details will be
entertained after last date for applying.”
3. The candidates have given their declaration in the online
application as under:
“I hereby declare that all the particulars furnished
in the application are true, correct and complete to the
best of my knowledge and belief. In the event of any
information being found false or incorrect or ineligibility
being detected, before or after the examination or at any
stage any action can be taken against me by TNPSC
including rejection of my application.”
4. Para 12J and 12L of the recruitment notification read as under:
“12J – Any subsequent claim made thereafter on
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/06/2025 04:41:41 pm )
W.A.(MD) Nos.555 & 556 of 2020
submission of online application will not be entertained.
Evidence for claims made in the online application
should be uploaded / submitted in time, when called
for. Failure to submit the documents within the
stipulated time limit will entail rejection of the
Application.
12L – Incomplete applications and application
containing wrong claims or incorrect particulars relating
to category of reservation / other basic qualification /
eligibility wise / age / communal categories /
educational qualification / physical qualification and
other basic eligibility criteria will be liable for rejection.”
5. The facts reveal that the respondent – candidates participated
in the selection process for appointment to the post of Assistant Horticulture
Officer. They have submitted their applications and participated in the
selection process. Admittedly, the respondent – candidates have stated their
community as “BC (Backward Community)” and “BC Maravars /
Karumaravars / Appanadu / Kondayamkottai Mara” instead of “DNC” and
“DNC” respectively. However, subsequently, claimed that they belong to DNC
(Denotified Community).
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/06/2025 04:41:41 pm )
W.A.(MD) Nos.555 & 556 of 2020
6. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant would
rely on the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of State of
Tamil Nadu vs. G.Hemalathaa, reported in (2020) 19 SCC 430, wherein, in
Paragraph No.8, the Apex Court has held as follows:
“8...The Instructions issued by the Commission
are mandatory, having the force of law and they have to
be strictly complied with. Strict adherence to the terms
and conditions of the Instructions is of paramount
importance. The High Court in exercise of powers under
Article 226 of the Constitution cannot modify/relax the
Instructions issued by the Commission.”
7. The above observations are made by the Apex Court relying on
the observations made in the case of Dr.M.Vennila vs. Tamil Nadu Public
Service Commission, reported in 2006 (3) CTC 449.
8. In the present case, alteration of the communal status cannot
be construed as trivial in nature and therefore, the relief granted by the Writ
Court is not inconsonance with the settled legal position. The instructions to
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/06/2025 04:41:41 pm )
W.A.(MD) Nos.555 & 556 of 2020
the candidates given in the notification unambiguously state that utmost care
should be taken by the candidates while filling up the online application. That
being so, the present writ appeals deserve consideration.
9. Accordingly, the writ appeals are allowed and the common writ
order dated 27.04.2019, passed in W.P.(MD) Nos.22006 & 22055 of 2018, is
set aside. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are
closed.
[S.M.S., J.] [A.D.M.C., J.]
25.06.2025
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
krk
To:
The Director of Horticulture
and Plantation Crops,
Office of the Director of Horticulture
and Plantation Crops,
Chepauk, Chennai-5.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/06/2025 04:41:41 pm )
W.A.(MD) Nos.555 & 556 of 2020
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
and
DR.A.D.MARIA CLETE, J.
krk
W.A.(MD) Nos.555 & 556 of 2020
and
C.M.P.(MD) Nos.3778 & 3782 of 2020
25.06.2025
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/06/2025 04:41:41 pm )
