E. Tamilmani v. The State of Tamil Nadu

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 17-4-2008CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMARW.P.No.37192 of 2007M.P.Nos.2 of 2007 & 1 of 20081.E. Tamilmani2.Dr.P.Viswanathan3.R. Gunasekaran4.Dr.K.Pazhanisamy...PetitionersVs.1.The State of Tamil Nadu,rep.by its Secretary to Government,Higher Education Department,Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.2.The Chairman, Teachers Recruitment Board,EVK Sampath Maaligai,4th Floor, DPI Compound,College Road, Chennai - 600 006.3.The Director,Directorate of Collegiate Education,Chennai - 600 006.4.National Council for Teacher Education,rep.by its Regional Director,1st Floor, CSD Building, HMT Post,Bangalore - 560 031.5.T. Ravichandran,6.Kannika Parameswari7.S. Akila...Respondents(RR-4 to 7 impleaded as per order of the Court dated 5.2.2008 in MPNo.2 of 2008)Prayer:This writ petition is filed under Article 226 ofConstitution of India, praying this Court to issue a writ ofcertiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the secondrespondent pertaining to the list of cancellation of provisionally https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ selected candidates dated 7.12.2007 published on 11.12.2007 and therevised list of provisionally selected candidates published on11.12.2007 and quash the same insofar as inclusion of thepetitioners in the cancellation list are concerned and exclusion oftheir names in the revised list of provisionally selectedcandidates published on 11.12.2007 is concerned, and consequentlydirect the second and third respondents to select and appoint thepetitioners to the post of Lecturers for Government Arts & ScienceColleges and Colleges of Education in accordance with the list ofcandidates provisionally selected for appointment to the post ofLecturers for Government Arts & Science colleges and Colleges ofEducation dated 19.11.2007. For Petitioners :Mrs.Nalini Chidambaram,Senior Counselfor Ms.C.UmaFor Respondents 1to3:Mr.G.Sankaran,Special Govt. PleaderFor 4th Respondent:Mr.K.Ramakrishna ReddyFor 5th Respondent:No appearanceFor Respondents 6&7:Mr.R.N.AmarnathO R D E R By consent of all parties, the writ petition itself istaken up for final disposal.2.Prayer in the writ petition is to issue a writ ofcertiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the secondrespondent pertaining to the list of cancellation of provisionallyselected candidates dated 7.12.2007 published on 11.12.2007 and therevised list of provisionally selected candidates published on11.12.2007 and quash the same insofar as inclusion of thepetitioners in the cancellation list are concerned and exclusion oftheir names in the revised list of provisionally selectedcandidates published on 11.12.2007 is concerned, and consequentlydirect the second and third respondents to select and appoint thepetitioners to the post of Lecturers for Government Arts & ScienceColleges and Colleges of Education in accordance with the list ofcandidates provisionally selected for appointment to the post ofLecturers for Government Arts & Science colleges and Colleges ofEducation dated 19.11.2007. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3. The case of the petitioners is that they are Post GraduateDegree Holders having more than 55% of marks in post graduatedegree and also completed M.Phil/Ph.D. The second respondent,through advertisement No.4/06-07, issued in leading newspapers on18.9.2006 notified vacancies for the post of Lecturers forGovernment Arts and Science Colleges and College of Education in 35subjects. The number of vacancies notified was 1,000. Accordingto the prospectus issued for the said selection, qualificationprescribed under clause 5 are as follows:a.All candidates other than SC/ST:Candidates withI.Postgraduate degree in the subject with minimum 55% marks andII.A pass in the UGC/CSIR/JRF/NET Lectureship test orState Level Education Testing (SLET).ORCandidates withI.Postgraduate degree in the subject with minimum 55%marks andII.M.Phil or Ph.D degree or both, are eligible to apply.b.For SC/ST candidates:Candidates withIII.Postgraduate degree in the subject with minimum50% marks andIV.A pass in the UGC/CSIR/JRF/NET Lectureship testor State Level Educational Testing (SLET),ORCandidates withIII.Postgraduate degree in the subject with minimum50% marks andIV.M.Phil or Ph.D degree or both, are eligible to apply.The scheme of selection was also notified under Clause 11.Petitioners submitted application in the prescribed forms beforethe last date and applied for the following posts: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ SlNoNameRollNumberSubjectQualificationTeach-ingExperi-ence1.E. TamilmaniF25120001EducationMathsM.Sc(Maths),M.Phil(Maths),M.EdEducation,PGDCA, (M.PhilEducation -Resultawaiting)12Years,4months2.Dr.P.ViswanathanF26200002EducationBiologicalScienceM.Sc.(Botany),M.Phil(Botany), Ph.D(Botany), M.EdEducation(M.PhilEducation -ResultAwaiting)6Years,8months3.R.GunasekaranF23220001TamilEducationM.A. (Tamil),M.Ed(Education),M.Phil(Tamil), SLET(Tamil),Currentlydoing Ph.D(Tamil/Education)7 Years4.Dr.K.PazhanisamyF26180002EducationBiologicalScienceM.Sc Zoology),M.Phil(Zoology),Ph.D(Zoology),M.Ed.(Education).4 YearsAccording to the petitioners they are eligible to apply for theposts they have applied viz., Education (Maths), Education(Biological Science), Education (Tamil), since they satisfy the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ qualification prescribed in clause 5 of the prospectus statedabove. Certificates of the petitioners were also verified. Markswere awarded for the experience qualification, etc., and they wereprovisionally selected as per the selection list published by thesecond respondent on 19.11.2007 under the following categories:SlNoNameTEEQBAInterviewTotalCommunalTurn1.E. Tamilmani (EducationMaths)1565531GT2.Dr.P.Viswanathan(Education BiologicalScience)1495533BG3.R. Gunasekaran(Education Tamil)1460525MG4.Dr.K.Pazhanisamy(Education BiologicalScience)790420SGHowever, on 11.12.2007 it was published in the website that thesecond respondent cancelled petitioners' provisional selection on7.12.2007 along with 19 other persons on verification of theireducational qualifications stating that the petitioners and other19 candidates are not having the requisite qualifications. Arevised list of provisionally selected candidates was publishedwherein candidates secured lesser marks than the petitioners areshown to be provisionally selected. According to the petitionersthey were employed in private colleges and on the basis of theirprovisional selection they have intimated their respective privatecolleges that they are going to resign since they have beenprovisionally selected as Lecturers in the College of Education.Since the petitioners' provisional selection was cancelled by thesecond respondent, they have jointly filed the writ petitionchallenging the order of cancellation of selection and prayed forsetting aside the cancellation order and for a direction to selectand appoint the petitioners to the post of Lecturers for theGovernment College of Education in accordance with the list ofcandidates provisionally selected for appointment on 19.11.2007.4.The main ground raised in the writ petition is that theyare fully qualified to be appointed to the post of Lecturers in theCollege of Education as they satisfy clause 5 of the prospectusissued by the respondents viz., qualification and the petitioners https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ having scored higher marks than the candidates now provisionallyselected viz., respondents 5, 6, 7 and others, their selectioncannot be cancelled and the same is violative of articles 14 and 16of constitution of India and it is unreasonable. It is also thecase of the petitioners that before cancelling the provisionalselection no notice was issued to the petitioners and thereforeprinciples of natural justice is violated.5.The respondents 1 and 3 filed counter affidavitcontending that as per G.O.Ms.No.111, 222 and 333 Higher Education,dated 24.3.1999, the minimum requirements for a Lecturer in theCollege of Education is that good academic record with 55% marks atthe masters level, qualified in National Eligibility Test oraccredited test. Relaxation of 5% may be provided from 55% to 50%of marks at the maters level for the SC/ST categories and arelaxation of 5% may be provided from 55% to 50% of marks to thePh.D. degree holders, who have passed their masters degree prior to19th September, 1991. The said qualifications prescribed wereamended by the Government letter dated 15.9.2006 based on theletter received from the Joint Secretary, University GrantsCommission dated 14.6.2006 by stating that NET or SLET or aaccredited test shall remain, the compulsory requirement forappointment as Lecturers for those with PG degree. However, thecandidates having Ph.D degree in the concerned subject are exemptedfrom NET or SLET or accredited test for PG level and UG levelteaching. The candidates having M.Phil degree in the concernedsubject are exempted from NET or SLET or accredited test for UGlevel teaching only. It is further stated in the counter affidavitthat UGC regulation do not stipulate any qualification to the postof Lecturers in the College of Education as it comes under theadministrative control of National Council of Teacher Education(NCTE), which is an autonomous body, formed by the CentralGovernment under NCTE Act, 1993.6.The qualification for the post of Lecturer in the Collegeof Education as per the NCTE norms at the time of issuingnotification was M.Ed/MA of education with 55% marks and B.Ed ormasters degree in a school subject with minimum 50% marks andM.Ed/M.A. (Education) with 55% of marks and B.Ed. It is furtherstated that apart from the above qualification prescribed, thecandidate shall have to qualify NET/SLET qualification oralternative qualification thereto as prescribed by the UGC fromtime to time, before the commencement of the academic session 2009-2010. It is further stated that there shall be relaxation inminimum percentage of marks for SC/ST/OBC and for other categoriesas per the rules of the Central/concerned state Government/UTAdministration. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ in respect of College of Education, the PG degree referred in theprospects denotes M.Ed degree only and not the other PG degree,which the candidates have acquired. When PG degree denotes M.Edqualification alone for not passing SLET or NET, one should havepassed M.Phil/Ph.D. in the subject of education alone and not inany other subject. Hence it is stated in the counter affidavitthat the petitioners are not entitled to have exemption frompossessing NET/SLET qualification and without noticing the saidqualification petitioners were provisionally selected and onnoticing the same and after due verification of petitionersqualification, they were found not eligible for selection andappointment as Lecturers in the College of Education.7.The 4th respondent NCTE filed counter affidavit statingthat the petitioners having not possessed M.Phil/Ph.D. ineducation, they are bound to pass NET or SLET for being appointedas Lecturers in the College of Education.8.The 6th respondent filed separate counter affidavitwherein also it is contended that the petitioners are not qualifiedfor being selected and appointed as Lecturers in the College ofeducation as they have not passed M.Phil/Ph.D. in Education andthereby they cannot be exempted from passing NET/SLET.9.Respondents 5 to 7 have passed M.Phil qualification ineducation and they have been now selected by the second respondentafter cancelling the petitioners' provisional selection and theyunderwent the training conducted for the newly recruited candidatesfrom 26.12.2007 and because of the interim order passed in thiswrit petition, they are unable to join in their posts, which arealready allotted by the Government through G.O.Ms.No.422 HigherEducation department, dated 14.12.2007.10.The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitionerssubmitted that the qualification prescribed for the post ofLecturer in the College of Education cannot be treated asM.Phil/Ph.D in education since the notification issued by thesecond respondent contain the subjects viz., Education (Tamil),Education (English), Education (Maths), Education (BiologicalScience), Education (Physical Science), Education (History),Education (Geology), Education (Education), Education (Economics),Education (Economics), Education (Logic), Education (ComputerScience) and Education (Home Science). The learned Senior Counselfurther submitted that the subject having been identified ineducation and particularly when applications are called for for thepost of Education (Education), only a person must have M.Phil inEducation or Ph.D. in Education and not in other special subjects https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ and following the said categorisation of different subjects ineducation, the officials of the second respondent verified thequalification of the petitioners thrice and awarded marks and alsomade selection rightly based on their marks and the same is nowcancelled without any reason on the technical interpretation thatthe petitioners are not having M.Phil in Education /Ph.D. inEducation. 11.The learned counsel for the respective respondentsreiterated their stand taken in the counter affidavits andsubmitted that the petitioners having not passed M.Phil/Ph.D. ineducation, which is the relevant subject for the colleges ofeducation, they are bound to pass NET or SLET tests and they arenot exempted from passing the said tests and therefore thecancellation of provisional selection of the petitioners are valid.12.I have considered the rival submissions made by thelearned counsel for the respective parties.13.The point in issue is whether the petitioners arequalified for being appointed as Lecturers in the College ofEducation.14.The petitioners are not having M.Phil in Education/Ph.D.in Education. The relevant subject as per Clause 5 in theprospectus for the colleges of education is whether education aloneor other subjects viz., Maths, Biological Science, Tamil, English,etc, has to be ascertained for the real determination of the issue.Whether the petitioners are qualified for appointment as Lecturersin B.Ed Colleges alone is not the issue. The issue is, petitionersadmittedly having not passed M.Phil/Ph.D in education whether theyare exempted from passing NET/SLET as per the notification callingfor applications.15.The 4th respondent, which is the expert body viz., NCTEin the counter affidavit filed, has stated that the petitioners canbe found to be qualified for the post of Lecturers in the Collegeof Education, provided they passed eligibility test of NET/SLET andthey having not passed the said eligibility test and they havingnot possessed of M.Phil/Ph.D in the subject of Education forclaiming exemption, petitioners are not qualified as per thenotification issued. The contention of the learned Senior Counselfor the petitioners that in the notification issued invitingapplications Education (Maths), Education (Tamil), Education(History), Education (Education), Education (Economics), Education(Computer Science), etc. having been called for, petitioners haveto be treated as qualified for the Lecturer post for that subject https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ in education cannot be accepted in view of the fact that the pointin issue is whether the petitioners have a right to claim exemptionfrom passing NET or SLET alone and not the eligibility to apply forthe post.16.As rightly contended by the learned counsel for therespondents, the petitioners are qualified for the post ofLecturers in the College of Education, provided they passed NET orSLET or they passed M.Phil/Ph.D in the subject of education.Admittedly the petitioners have not passed M.Phil/Ph.D in educationand therefore they are not exempted from not having passedNET/SLET. Hence, cancellation of provisional selection given tothe petitioners by the second respondent immediately is just andproper. Since the petitioners selection were only provisional, thecancellation made by the second respondent without any notice tothe petitioners is also justified.17.It is well settled in law that merely because a candidateis selected and placed in the selection list, he will not get anyright to get appointment and the said issue is already wellsettled. The selection order intimating the selection ofpetitioners is only provisional and not final. A provisionalselection can be withdrawn on valid grounds. The petitioners arefound unqualified i.e., not entitled to get exemption from passingNET or SLET as they have not passed M.Phil/Ph.D in education.Petitioners having been found to be not qualified by the secondrespondent as well as NCTE, which are experts, their decisioncannot be interfered under Article 226 of constitution of India.In view of the above finding, I hold there is no merit in thewrit petition and the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.Connected miscellaneous petitions are also dismissed.vrSd/-Asst. Registrar./true copy/Sub Asst. Registrar. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To1.The Secretary to Government, The State of Tamil Nadu, Higher Education Department,Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.2.The Chairman, Teachers Recruitment Board,EVK Sampath Maaligai, 4th Floor, DPI Compound,College Road, Chennai - 600 006.3.The Director,Directorate of Collegiate Education,Chennai - 600 006.4.The Regional Director,National Council for Teacher Education,1st Floor, CSD Building, HMT Post, Bangalore - 560 031.1 cc to M/s.K.Ramakrishna Reddy, Advocate, SR.218481 cc to M/s.C.Uma, Advocate, SR.281421 cc to Mr.R.N.Amarnath, Advocate, SR.228041 cc to the Government Pleader, SR.22024ms (co)dv/28.4. W.P.No.37192 of 2007