High Court · 2025

W.P.(MD) No.30143 of 2024BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDate of Reserving the OrderDate of Pronouncing the Order 08.10.202524.11.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABUW.P.(MD) No.30143 of 2024andW.M.P.(MD) Nos.25363, 25366 of 2024 & 1002 of 2025T.Thangamalar ... Petitioner-vs-1.The General Manager (HR) Airports Authority of India (AAI) Southern Region Chennai-600 0162.The Assistant General Manager Airports Authority of India (AAI) Southern Region Chennai-600 016... RespondentsPRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a ____________Page 1 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.30143 of 2024writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for records of impugned order of Ref. AAI/SR/M/2-1(13)/DR/2023/EH/R&P/1284 dated 29.11.2024 passed by the 2nd respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the Respondents to appoint the Petitioner as a Senior Assistant (Accounts) in their organization.For Petitioner:Mr.K.Sridharfor Mr.K.Sathiya SinghFor Respondents:Fr.Xavier Arul RajSenior Advocatefor M/s.Father Xavier AssociatesO R D E RThe Writ Petition had been filed to quash the impugned order dated 29.11.2024 passed by the 2nd respondent and consequently direct the Respondents to appoint the Petitioner as a Senior Assistant (Accounts) in their organization. 2. Heard Mr.K.Sridhar, learned counsel appearing for Mr.K.Sathiya Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Fr.Xavier Arul Raj, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the respondents.____________Page 2 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.30143 of 20243. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the respondent had issued an advertisement on 27.12.2023 for the post of Senior Assistant (Accounts) for a notified 19 vacancies. He would further submit that three posts were reserved for Schedule Caste and the petitioner had also applied for the said post and had attended the Computer based Written Test on 18.03.2024 at Madurai and cleared the same on merits. The petitioner had been called for document verification and Computer Literacy Test. The document verification was held on 30.08.2024 and the respondent had called four candidates for document verification for the Schedule Caste reserved post, one candidate did not appear. After the document verification, they ought to have conducted Computer Literacy Test at their premises itself, but on the contrary, the literacy test was conducted outside the premises at Stenographers Guild Complex, T.Nagar which is a private agency. Based upon the valuation of the said skilled test, the petitioner had been declared to have been not qualified in the Computer Literacy Test. Therefore, the petitioner had approached this Court by way of the present Writ Petition. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would vehemently contend that the Computer Literacy Test ought to have been conducted only at the ____________Page 3 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.30143 of 2024respondent's premises and not outside the respondent premises and such conducting of test through private agency is also bad. He would submit that out of four persons, who were called for document verification of Computer Literacy Test, only three persons including the petitioner attended and two of the candidates have been selected leaving out the petitioner. He would submit that the petitioner is well qualified to be appointed pursuant to the advertisement. Hence, he seeks indulgence of this Court to the order of rejection and consequently, direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Senior Assistant Accounts in its organisation.5. Countering his arguments, the learned Senior counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that as per the notification, the candidates would have also to qualify in the Computer Literacy Test. There has been no prescription of the venue where the Computer Literacy Test would be conducted. For conducting the Computer Literacy Test, requirement of availability of sufficient number of computers including the spare computers, space for seating of candidates, experienced professionals who have requisite knowledge and skills to conduct the test, evaluate the performance and declaration of results etc., are ____________Page 4 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.30143 of 2024required and such expertise is not available with the respondents. Hence, it has always been out sourced by following guidelines prescribed by the Government in its portal namely, the Government e-Marketplace (Gem) Portal. Tenders were invited as per the codal requirement for conducting such test and three agencies have made an application of which the Stenographers Guild, Chennai was appointed as a Nodal agency for conducting the Computer Literacy Test. The syllabus for Computer Literacy Test comprised of MS.Word, MS.Excel and MS.Power Point, in all carrying 50 marks, i.e., 20 marks for MS Word for which qualifying marks was 10, 20 marks for MS Excel for which qualifying marks was 10 and 10 marks for MS Power Point for which qualifying marks was 5. The petitioner obtained 16.5 out of 20 in MS Word; 6.5 out of 20 in MS Excel and 4.5 out of 10 in MS Power point. Thus, the petitioner had not qualified in MS Excel and MS Power Point as she had got below the qualifying marks and hence, the petitioner cannot be appointed in the said post Hence, he seeks dismissal of the Writ Petition. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on either side and perused the materials placed on record.____________Page 5 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.30143 of 20247. The primordial contention of the petitioner is that the respondents ought to have conducted the Computer Literacy Test within its campus. It is the stand of the respondents that for conducting the Computer Literacy Test expertise as also infrastructures are required and for that purpose, they have also engaged a third party agency by following the procedure prescribed by the Central Government in selecting such agencies. When expertise with infrastructure is required, the employer do not have such expertise and the infrastructure in that regard, there is no error on the part of the respondents in choosing the third party for conducting such Computer Literacy Test. It is to be noted that even according to the petitioner, two other candidates who participated in the Computer Literacy Test conducted by the third party, have qualified themselves by achieving the qualifying criteria in Computer Literacy Test. The petitioner admittedly had failed in the Computer Literacy Test by failing to achieve the minimum qualifying marks in MS Excel and MS Power Point. Having failed to achieve the minimum qualifying marks, the petitioner cannot be heard to say that she is entitled to be appointed.____________Page 6 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.30143 of 20248. For the aforesaid reasons, this Court do not find any merits in this Writ Petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 24.11.2025NCC :Yes / NoIndex :Yes / NoInternet:Yes / No pbnTo1.The General Manager (HR) Airports Authority of India (AAI) Southern Region Chennai-600 0162.The Assistant General Manager Airports Authority of India (AAI) Southern Region Chennai-600 016____________Page 7 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.30143 of 2024K.KUMARESH BABU, J.pbnPRE-DELIVERY ORDERINW.P.(MD) No.30143 of 2024andW.M.P.(MD) Nos.25363, 25366 of 2024 & 1002 of 202524.11.2025____________Page 8 of 8