Telangana High Court
Telangana State Public Service ... vs P.Maheshwari And 3 Others on 28 October, 2021
Bench: Satish Chandra Sharma, A.Rajasheker Reddy
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY
WRIT APPEAL No.96 of 2021
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)
The present writ appeal is arising out of order dated
06.01.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge in
W.P.No.1936 of 2019.
The facts of the case reveal that respondent No.1, who
belongs to SC category, has submitted an application
pursuant to notification dated 21.10.2017 for appointment to
the post of Physical Education Teacher (Urdu Medium) and
she has obtained 29.592% marks. The terms and conditions
of the advertisement provided for cut-off marks. For general
category, the cut-off is 40%, for backward class 35% and for
SCs and STs, the cut-off is 30%.
Undisputedly, the facts also reveal that the Public
Service Commission was not able to fill up a single vacancy in
the SC category, as there were no qualified candidates (SC
women category). Respondent No.1 preferred a writ petition
before this Court and the same has been allowed by the
learned Single Judge. The order passed by the learned Single
Judge reads as under:
"Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
contended that as per the notification issued by the
respondents, the respondents have got every power to relax
the minimum qualifying marks in respect of SC candidates
when no SC candidates are available. The respondents are
not considering the case of the petitioner on the ground
that she has not secured 30% marks. It is further
contended that Clause 1 of Para VIII of notification
prescribes the minimum qualifying marks for selection of
OCs as 40%, BCs as 35%, SCs & STs as 30% and the
minimum qualifying marks are relaxable in the case of
SC/ST/BC at the discretion of the Commission. It is further
contended that even though there is a vacancy which could
not be filled up for want of suitable SC woman 3 candidate,
the respondents are not relaxing the minimum qualifying
marks. The petitioner has secured 29.592% marks,
whereas the qualifying marks are 30%, therefore, in all
fairness, the respondents ought to have taken into
consideration 29.592% marks as that of 30% and qualified
the petitioner by exercising powers under Clause 1 of Para
VIII of the notification. It is further contended that the
respondents have deleted three questions, for which, the
petitioner has written correct answers. Therefore, it is
prayed that appropriate orders be passed in the writ
petition directing the respondents to round off the fraction
of marks secured by the petitioner to the next equal
number of 30% treating that she got qualified in the
selection and consider her case for appointment to the post
of PET (Urdu Medium) in the existing vacancy which could
not be filled up for want of SC woman candidate.
Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the
respondents contended that the respondents cannot relax
the minimum qualifying marks as set out in the
notification. In support of his contention, he placed reliance
on the judgment of the Apex Court in Orissa Public Service
Commission & another vs. Rupashree Chowdhary & another
(Civil Appeal No.6201 of 2011) and contended that the Apex
Court has found 4 fault with the rounding off of the
aggregate marks, and hence, the case of the petitioner
cannot be considered for rounding off the fraction of
29.592% to 30%. There are no merits in the writ petition
and the same is liable to be dismissed.
Having considered the rival submissions made by the
learned counsel on either side, this Court is of the view that
the case of the petitioner has to be considered on two
grounds; (1) The respondents could not fill up the post
meant for SC (women) as there are no qualified candidates
in that category; (2) The petitioner has secured 29.592%
marks, whereas the qualifying marks are 30%. In the
notification, it is clearly stated that the respondents have
every power to relax the minimum qualifying marks in
respect of SC/ST/BC. In the case on hand, as there are no
qualified candidates in SC (Women) category, the
respondents ought to have exercised their powers by
relaxing the minimum qualifying marks secured by the
petitioner from 29.592% to that of 30% by rounding off the
fraction. The judgment relied on by the learned Standing
Counsel cannot be applicable to the case on hand. The
Apex Court has held that the Commission shall call for
interview, the candidates who have secured not less than
45% marks in aggregate and a minimum of 33% marks in
each paper in the main written examination and in that 5
context, the Apex Court held that the percentage of marks
cannot be rounded off. In the case on hand, the Public
Service Commission has got power to relax the minimum
qualifying marks in respect of SCs, STs and BCs. As the
Public Service Commission is vested with such power, it
ought to have exercised its power and relaxed the minimum
qualifying marks. More so, when there are no qualified and
eligible candidates, the Public Service Commission can
consider the case of the petitioner by rounding off the
qualifying marks from 29.592% to 30%, so that she
becomes qualified for appointment to the post of PET.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed and the
respondents are directed to consider the case of the
petitioner for appointment to the post of PET (Urdu
Medium) by rounding off the fraction of marks from
29.592% to 30%. No costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, pending, if any, shall stand
closed."
Learned counsel for the appellant - Telangana State
Public Service Commission has stated before this Court that
the cut-off marks could not have been rounded off to 30%, as
respondent No.1/writ petitioner has secured 29.592% marks
only keeping in view the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Orissa Public Service Commission and
another vs. Rupashree Chowdhary and another1 and,
therefore, the judgment delivered by the learned Single Judge
is bad in law.
The learned Single Judge has taken care of the
aforesaid judgment and has rightly arrived at a conclusion
that the respondents were not able to fill up a single post
meant for SC women and there was no other qualified
candidate in that particular category. He has also taken note
of the fact that respondent No.1/writ petitioner has secured
29.592% marks and the qualifying marks were 30%. He has
also taken note of the fact that in the notification there was a
Civil Appeal No.6201 of 2011
power to relax the minimum qualifying marks in respect of
SCs and STs and Backward classes.
In the considered opinion of this Court, the learned
Single Judge was justified in directing consideration of the
candidature of respondent No.1 keeping in view the relaxation
clause specifically in the light of the fact that no other SC
women was available by rounding off the qualifying marks
from 29.592% to 30%. This Court does not find any reason to
interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
The writ appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ
appeal shall also stand dismissed. There shall be no order as
to costs.
__________________________________
SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ
______________________________
A. RAJASHEKER REDDY, J
28.10.2021
ES
