Madras High Court
Dr.Madurambigai A vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 7 March, 2025
Author: C.V.Karthikeyan
Bench: C.V.Karthikeyan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.03.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
W.P.No.6485 of 2025
and W.M.P.No.7134 of 2025
Dr.Madurambigai A .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
Represented by its Principal Secretary
Health and Family Welfare Department
Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.
2.Medical Services Recruitment Board
Represented by its Chairperson
7th Floor, DMS Buildings
358, Anna Salai, Teynampet,
Chennai – 600 006.
3.Directorate of Public Health and Preventive Medicine
Rep. by the Director of Public Health and Preventive Medicine,
359, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 006. .. Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to declare
the answer to question number 9 in the Subject Paper for the recruitment to
the post of Assistant Surgeon (General) as incorrect and consequently,
award one (1) mark to the petitioner and call the petitioner for certificate
verification for the post of Assistant Surgeon (General).
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/03/2025 08:44:22 pm )
2
For Petitioner .. Mr.Suhrith Parthasarathy
For R1 & R3 .. Mr.M.Bindran,
Additional Government Pleader.
For R2 .. Mr.J.Ravindran, AAG
Assisted by Mr.L.Murugavelu,
Standing Counsel.
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of a Mandamus seeking
a direction against the 2nd respondent to declare the answer to question
number 9 in the subject paper for recruitment to the post of Assistant
Surgeon (General) as in correct and grant one mark to the petitioner.
2.The learned Additional Advocate General had produced the
reference materials on the basis of which, the Expert Committee had taken a
decision that a particular option was the correct answer. This particular
issue was contested by the learned counsel for the petitioner and options
were given to both the petitioner and the respondents to file further
affidavit. Both of them took up that opportunity and filed their affidavits. In
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/03/2025 08:44:22 pm )
the further affidavit filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent, it had been stated
as follows:
“16.It is respectfully submitted that the petitioner herein
has secured 52.00 marks in the computer based test for the post
of Assistant Surgeon (General) 2024 and was awarded 3 marks
for Covid duty whereby her total marks is 55.00 marks and she
belong to (BC) communal category with D.O.B 15.05.1997,
whereas the last selected candidate in the Provisional Selection
List belong to (BC) communal category has secured 58.00
marks and the cut off D.O.B is 30.06.1998 for BC(G) and
15.07.1998 for BC(W).
17.It is respectfully submitted that, even after
considering 1 mark for the Question No.9, as claimed by the
petitioner, she cannot be accommodated into the Provisional
Selection List as she has not reached the Zone of
Consideration.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/03/2025 08:44:22 pm )
3.This fact had been put to the learned counsel for the petitioner. This
fact cannot be either denied or disputed by the learned counsel. I must place
on record my deep appreciation for the strenuous efforts taken by the
learned counsel for the petitioner in projecting and advancing the case of the
petitioner. But unfortunately, the petitioner fell just short of coming within
the Zone of Consideration.
4.Be that as it may, the learned counsel for the petitioner still insisted
that the Court should examine the correctness or otherwise of the option
given by the Expert Committee and also examine the reference materials as
provided by the learned counsel and still consider whether the claim of the
petitioner could be addressed by this Court.
5.However, it must be pointed out that the Hon'ble Supreme Court
had held as follows in the judgment reported in (2018) 7 SCC 254, Uttar
Pradesh Public Service Commission through its Chairman and Another
Vs. Rahul Singh and Another.
“14. In the present case, we find that all the three
questions needed a long process of reasoning and the High
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/03/2025 08:44:22 pm )
Court itself has noticed that the stand of the Commission is
also supported by certain textbooks. When there are
conflicting views, then the court must bow down to the opinion
of the experts. Judges are not and cannot be experts in all
fields and, therefore, they must exercise great restraint and
should not overstep their jurisdiction to upset the opinion of
the experts.
15. In view of the above discussion, we are clearly of the
view that the High Court overstepped its jurisdiction by giving
the directions which amounted to setting aside the decision of
experts in the field. As far as the objection of the appellant
Rahul Singh is concerned, after going through the question on
which he raised an objection, we ourselves are of the prima
facie view that the answer given by the Commission is correct.
16. In view of the above discussion, we allow the appeal
filed by the U.P. Public Service Commission and set aside the
judgment [Rahul Singh v. State of U.P., 2018 SCC OnLine All
776] of the Allahabad High Court. The appeals filed by Rahul
Singh and Jay Bux Singh and others are dismissed. All
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/03/2025 08:44:22 pm )
pending applications stand disposed of.
6.In view of the dictum laid above, without entering into any further
detailed discussion, but wishing the petitioner all the very best in her future
endeavours, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently,
connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
07.03.2025
smv
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/03/2025 08:44:22 pm )
To
1.The Principal Secretary
Health and Family Welfare Department
Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Chairperson
Medical Services Recruitment Board
7th Floor, DMS Buildings
358, Anna Salai, Teynampet,
Chennai – 600 006.
3.The Director of Public Health and Preventive Medicine
Directorate of Public Health and Preventive Medicine,
359, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 006.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/03/2025 08:44:22 pm )
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.
smv
07.03.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/03/2025 08:44:22 pm )
