High Court · 2025

W.P.No.11653 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASCORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN W.P.No.11653 of 2016andW.M.P.No.10061 of 2016Judgment reserved on 06.03.2025Judgment pronounced on 25.04.20251.Dhayalan,J2.Arunprasanth.M3.Thulasi.C,4.Pasupathi.S5.Tharaniraj...Petitioners.....Vs.....1. The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep.by its Secretary to Government, Handlooms, Handicrafts, Textiles & Khadi Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.2. The Director of Sericulture, Foulks Complex, Anaimedu, Salem-1. Salem District. .....Respondents Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the second respondent Inspector of Sericulture Examination 2016 - 1/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.11653 of 2016results published on 01.03.2016 and selection list for the post of Junior Inspector of Sericulture for the year 2015-2016 published on 02.03.2016 in Notification No.1/2016 dated 13.01.2016 and quash the same as illegal in so far as the petitioners are concerned and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to publish viva voice marks of the petitioners and select and appoint the petitioner in the post of Junior Inspector of Sericulture in the proceedings of the 2nd respondent in advertisement No.1 of 2015 dated 09.05.2015 and subsequent notification No.1 of 2016 dated 13.01.2016 in the official web-site of the 2nd respondent.For Petitioners : Mr.C.P.SivamohanFor Mr.M.Habeeb RahmanFor Respondents : Mr.P.Muthukumar,Additional Advocate General-V Assisted by Mr.R.Kumaravel, Additional Government Pleader******* O R D E ROne Dhalayan and four others have filed the above Writ Petition, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the second respondent-the Junior Inspector of Sericulture- pertaining to the Examination 2016 results published on 01.03.2016 and the selection list for the post of Junior Inspector of Sericulture for the year 2015–2016, published on 02.03.2016 on the official website of the second 2/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.11653 of 2016respondent under Notification No.1 of 2016 dated 13.01.2016, and to quash the same. 2.The brief facts leading to the filing of the above Writ Petition are that the Sericulture Department published a notification on 13.01.2016 for the selection to the posts of 43 Assistant Inspectors of Sericulture and 257 Junior Inspectors of Sericulture.3. A counter has been filed by the second respondent herein. In his counter, he has specifically stated that :(i)In the notification itself, it has been clearly indicated that certificates obtained from the following units or individuals will not be treated as valid, as they do not cover the basic Sericulture activities. The mandatory component of learning Sericulture has not been provided by the following units:1.Private Chawkie Rearing Centres2.Private Polyclinic Centres3.Private Grainages4.Private Reeling Units(ii) One J. Dhayalan and D. Tharaniraj obtained certificates from a Private Chawkie Rearing Centre, while M. Arunprasanth, C. Thulasi, and S. Pasupathi obtained certificates from a Private Grainage. Hence, the above 3/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.11653 of 2016petitioners were not selected. 4. In the counter, the contesting second respondent stated that experience certificates obtained along with the prescribed qualifications were duly considered, and the selected candidates had produced the same. The marks obtained by the selected candidates and the training centres they attended are extracted below. :- 5. Based on the above counter, the learned Standing Counsel for the Director of Sericulture contended that:(i) The Director of Sericulture constituted a High-Level Committee comprising Technically Qualified Officers for the purpose of selecting 4/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.11653 of 2016candidates through interviews focused on technical aspects.(ii) Based on the responses provided by the candidates, appropriate marks were awarded by the Committee, which consisted of the Assistant Secretary (Technical), Central Silk Board, Bangalore; Deputy Secretary to Government; Joint Director of Sericulture; Deputy Director of Sericulture; Assistant Director of Sericulture; and Scientists from the Central Sericultural Research and Training Institute, Mysore.(iii) The interviews were conducted from 17.02.2016 to 20.02.2016. After the selection process, the Committee submitted the list of selected candidates to the Director of Sericulture for necessary action. Based on the marks obtained, appointments were made to the post of Junior Inspector of Sericulture.6. He further stated that similarly placed individuals had filed W.P. No. 24731 of 2016, which was dismissed by this Court on 22.08.2022, on the grounds of laches. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the rejection of their training certificates is unfair and inequitable, as even the selected candidates obtained their experience certificates from similarly placed individuals.8. Based on the above allegations, this Court, by an order dated 20.02.2006, directed the formation of a Committee to verify the certificates 5/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.11653 of 2016produced by the selected candidates, including the training certificates obtained by them and the centres where such training was undergone. Accordingly, it appears that a Committee consisting of eight members has been appointed, as stated in the counter affidavit. 9. The Committee, constituted pursuant to the earlier order, submitted a report, which has been produced before this Court. The report indicates that the Committee verified the experience certificates produced by the petitioners. It was confirmed that the petitioners had obtained certificates from the following Private Chawkie Rearing Centres and Private Grainages. Sl.NoName of the petitionerCertificate obtained fromInstitution TypeReason for Non-selection1.J.DhayalanSri Dhrowbathi Amman Chawkie Rearing CentrePrivate Chawkie Rearing Centre2.ArunprasanthBalaji Grainage, DharmapuriPrivate Grainage3.ThulasiBalaji Grainage, DharmapuriPrivate Grainage4.PasupathiBalaji Grainage, DharmapuriPrivate Grainage5.TharanirajSri Dhrowbathi Amman Chawkie Rearing CentrePrivate Chawkie Rearing CentreExperience Certificate Not valid6/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.11653 of 201610. Admittedly, silk production consists of the following activities: -Sl.NoName of the ActivityPlace of happening1.Silkworm Egg Production (stage I)Grainage2.Silkworm Hatching and Rearing (Stage II)Chawkie Rearing Centre3.Silkworm Rearing (Stage III)Sericulture Farms4.Raw Silk Production (Stage IV)Silk Reeling Unit5.Twisted Silk Production (Stage V)Silk Twisting Unit11. In this instance, the Writ Petitioners 1 and 5 obtained and submitted experience certificates issued by the Sri Dhrowbathi Amman Chawkie Rearing Centre. However, based on the instructions issued in the notification, the interview committee did not accept the experience certificates from the Sri Dhrowbathi Amman Chawkie Rearing Centre and did not award any interview marks to Writ Petitioners 1 and 5, namely J. Dhayalan and Tharaniraj. 12.It is to be noted that Balaji Grainage, Dharmapuri, is a private grainage where only grainage activities are carried out, which is insufficient to be considered as practical experience in Sericulture, as required for appointment to the post of Junior Inspector of Sericulture. In this instance, 7/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.11653 of 2016Writ Petitioners 2, 3, and 4 obtained and submitted experience certificates issued by Balaji Grainage, Dharmapuri. However, based on the instructions issued in the notification, the interview committee did not accept the experience certificates from Balaji Grainage, Dharmapuri, and did not award any interview marks to Writ Petitioners 2, 3, and 4, namely Arunprasanth, Thulasi, and Pasupathi. 13. As seen from the notification, this Court finds that experience certificates for 6 months in Sericulture obtained from the following institutions cannot be accepted, as they cannot be treated as valid experience, and the names have been mentioned therein. The maximum marks allocated for the written examination are 175, while the maximum marks for the interview are 125, making the total marks for the selection process 200. Accordingly, it appears that the selection committee did not treat the experience certificates obtained by these petitioners as valid, which is inconsistent with the instructions issued in the notification dated 13.01.2016. The members of the selection committee did not award specific marks to certificates obtained from government institutions and other private institutions. 8/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.11653 of 201614. After perusing the notification, I find that initially, Notification No. 1 of 2016, dated 13.01.2016, was issued calling for applications for direct recruitment to the posts of Assistant Inspector and Junior Inspector of Sericulture. Prior to this, the second respondent/Director of Sericulture had issued Notification No. 01/2015, dated 09.05.2015, inviting applications for direct recruitment to the posts of Assistant Inspector and Junior Inspector of Sericulture. A corrigendum to this notification, dated 16.05.2015, was also issued. However, the above corrigendum was set aside by this Court in its order dated 27.11.2015, made in W.P. Nos. 19005 to 19009 of 2015 and 26531 of 2015. As a result, a fresh notification was issued by the second respondent, inviting applications for the direct recruitment of 43 posts of Assistant Inspectors of Sericulture and 257 posts of Junior Inspectors of Sericulture for the year 2015-2016, as per the notification dated 13.01.2016. 15. Hence, I find that the petitioners were not diligent enough to follow the instructions issued in Notification No. 1 of 2016, dated 13.01.2016, and failed to attach a valid experience certificate along with their application. The corrigendum, which was set aside by the Court's order dated 27.11.2015, as 9/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.11653 of 2016indicated supra, assumes significance.16. Therefore, I find that the primary contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that necessary marks were not allotted to the experience certificates fails for the reasons stated supra with regard to the report on the selected candidates. The requirements have been duly complied with, and this Court finds that the petitioners did not satisfy the eligibility conditions specified by the second respondent in the notification dated 13.01.2016. Consequently, as marks were not awarded for the experience certificates, the petitioners were not selected for the post. 17. In such a case, the petition is misconceived, and the petitioners have suppressed the subsequent notification, which specifies the institutions that will not be treated as valid experience certificates. Therefore, I am inclined to impose costs of Rs. 5,000/- to be payable to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. After reviewing the materials furnished by the second respondent, the report of the committee constituted pursuant to this Court's order, and the experience certificates annexed by the petitioners, it is clear that the experience certificates were rightly rejected by the second 10/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.11653 of 2016respondent.18. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected W.M.P is closed. 25.04.2025nvi Index : Yes / NoNeutral Citation : Yes/NoTo1. The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep.by its Secretary to Government, Handlooms, Handicrafts, Textiles & Khadi Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.2. The Director of Sericulture, Foulks Complex, Anaimedu, Salem-1. Salem District.11/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.11653 of 2016 RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.nvi order inW.P.No.11653 of 2016 andW.M.P.No.10061 of 2016 25.04.202512/12