High Court · 2025

W.P.(MD)No.14266 of 2022BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED: 22.10.2025CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSEW.P.(MD)No.14266 of 2022andW.M.P.(MD)Nos.10194 to 10196 of 2022A.Govindasamy : PetitionerVs.1.The Secretary, Human Resources Management Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, St. George Fort, Chennai – 600 009.2.The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, TNPSC Road, Park Town, Chennai – 600 003. : RespondentsPRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records of the second respondent pertaining to the oral Test list published on 29.06.2022 by the second respondent for the posts 1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.14266 of 2022included in Combined Civil Services Examination – I (Group – 1 services) – 2020 for Notification No.01/2020 dated 20.01.2020 and quash the same as illegal and direct the second respondent to allow only the candidate those who are benefitted under Tamil medium education to avail PSTM quota and also direct the first respondent to frame proper rules / GO for issuing PSTM certificate and employment within the stipulated time period. For Petitioner : Mr.G.Sakthi RaoFor Respondent No.1 : Mr.A.Baskaran, Additional Government PleaderFor Respondent No.2 : Mr.J.Anand Kumar, Standing CounselO R D E RThis Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned selection list published on 29.06.2022, by the second respondent for the posts included in Combined Civil Services Examination [Group – I services], 2020 for Notification No.01/2020 dated 20.01.2020. 2.The petitioner has challenged the impugned selection list on the ground that candidates having studied in the distant education programme have been considered under the PSTM quota 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.14266 of 2022despite the fact that as per the TNPSC notification, they cannot be considered under the PSTM quota.3.The petitioner claims that he applied for the subject post under the recruitment notification which culminated in the issuance of the impugned selection list under the PSTM quota, but he was not selected. The contention of the petitioner in this Writ Petition is that eventhough certain candidates who had studied under the distant education programme and do not fall under the PSTM quota as they have not studied Tamil medium and have obtained scholarship were included illegally in the impugned selection list. 4.A counter affidavit has been filed by the second respondent denying the contentions of the petitioner and they would categorically contend that only by following the due procedure as contemplated under the recruitment notification, the candidates were selected under the impugned selection list. 5.Admittedly, in the affidavit filed in support of this Writ Petition, the petitioner has not pointed out as to which of the candidates in the impugned selection list were appointed under the PSTM quota though they do not fall under the said category on 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.14266 of 2022account of the fact that the said candidates had studied in Tamil medium under the distant education programme which does not qualify them to be appointed to the subject post under the recruitment notification. A categorical assertion has also been made by the second respondent that only in accordance with UGC regulations, which was also well known to the public at large through a public notice, the candidates under the PSTM quota were selected under the impugned selection list. They have also stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioner was considered only under the PSTM quota and since he did not come under the zone of consideration for being appointed to the said post, his name was not included in the impugned selection list. In fact, in the counter affidavit they have stated that the petitioner had passed the written examination but did not qualify in the oral interview, eventhough, his case was considered under PSTM quota.6.A legal right can be established only if the petitioner is able to point out to this Court that in the impugned selection list, persons who are not eligible to be appointed under the PSTM quota were in fact selected. In the affidavit filed in support of this Writ Petition, there is absolutely no whisper about the same. Based on vague allegations and based on surmises and conjectures, this Court 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.14266 of 2022in a Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot grant relief to the petitioner. A categorical stand has also been taken by the second respondent that only by following due procedure established under law and only by following the regulations under the recruitment notification, the selection process was conducted by the respondents. 7.It is also brought to the notice of this Court by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the second respondent Commission that the entire selection process pursuant to the recruitment notification has already got over and appointment orders have already been issued. 8.Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that since an interim order was passed by this Court at the time of admission of this Writ Petition that the impugned selection list is subject to the result of this Writ Petition, the petitioner's grievance can even now be redressed by this Court. As pointed out earlier, when the petitioner has not been able to substantiate in the affidavit that in the impugned selection list some of the candidates selected under the PSTM quota are not eligible on account of the petitioner's contention that they had studied through distant education [Tamil 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.14266 of 2022medium], the question of this Court making a roving enquiry, that too, at this stage when the selection process has already got over and appointment orders have already been issued does not arise. 9.For the foregoing reasons, there is no merit in this Writ Petition.10.Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 22.10.2025Index :Yes / NoInternet : Yes / NoNCC : Yes/NoMR6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.14266 of 2022To1.The Secretary, Human Resources Management Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, St. George Fort, Chennai – 600 009.2.The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, TNPSC Road, Park Town, Chennai – 600 003.7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.14266 of 2022ABDUL QUDDHOSE. , J. MRW.P.(MD)No.14266 of 202222.10.20258/8