| |
CDJ 2026 MHC 387
|
| Court : Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court |
| Case No : W.P. (MD) No. 35698 of 2025 & WMP. (MD) Nos. 28289, 28291 & 28292 of 2025 |
| Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B. PUGALENDHI |
| Parties : S. Deva Versus The Commissioner, Rural Development & Panchayat Raj Department, Chennai & Others |
| Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: M. Kannan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Ajmal Khan, Additional Advocate General assisted by C. Venkatesh Kumar, Special Government Pleader |
| Date of Judgment : 12-12-2025 |
| Head Note :- |
| Constitution of India - Article 226 - |
| Summary :- |
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Article 226 of the Constitution of India
- Tamil Nadu Village Panchayat Secretaries (Conditions of Service) Rules, 2023
- Rule 3(2) of the Tamil Nadu Village Panchayat Secretaries (Conditions of Service) Rules, 2023
- G.O.Ms.No.198, Rural Development Panchayat Raj Department dated 04.09.2025
- Notification No.Na.Ka.M3/38005/2025
2. Catch Words:
- Writ of Certiorari
- Mandamus
- Open competitive recruitment
- Rank list
- Cost
3. Summary:
The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari and mandamus to compel the respondents to issue a call‑letter for interview, alleging that the recruitment of Village Panchayat Secretaries was not conducted through an open competitive process as required by Rule 3(2) of the 2023 Rules. The respondents contended that recruitment was governed by G.O. No. 198 dated 04‑09‑2025, which prescribed evaluation based on 10th‑standard marks (85 %) and interview marks (15 %). The petitioner’s 10th‑standard score of 410 fell below the cut‑off of 489, rendering him ineligible for interview. The court noted that the rank list, mandated to be published on the TN Rural Development website, had not been posted at the relevant time, causing the petitioner’s confusion. However, the court held that the recruitment process complied with the applicable rules and government order, and the petitioner’s omission from the shortlist was justified. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, and the respondents were ordered to pay Rs 5,000 as costs to the petitioner.
4. Conclusion:
Petition Dismissed |
| Judgment :- |
|
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the impugned communication of rejection of call letter of the petitioner published in Tamil Nadu Rural Development Website dated Nil by the 2nd respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently, direct the respondents to issue call letter for interview to the petitioner for the post of Village Panchayat Secretary for participation in the further process of selection pursuant to the Notification No.Na.Ka.M3/38005/2025 issued by the 2nd respondent dated 08.10.2025.)
1. The petitioner has applied for the post of Village Panchayat Secretary, pursuant to the notification issued by the District Administration. The petitioner has scored 410 marks out of 500 in 10th standard. The petitioner, believing that he has secured sufficient marks for the post of Village Panchayat Secretary, has approached this court challenging the intimation of his non-selection to the post by the Department.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner, by referring to Rule 3(2) of the Tamil Nadu Village Panchayat Secretaries (Conditions of Service) Rules, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') submitted that the Village Panchayat Secretaries shall be selected through open competitive recruitment process and also as ordered by the Government. There was no proper open competitive recruitment process adopted in selecting the candidates for the Village Panchayat Secretaries and therefore, the petitioner has not been shortlisted for the interview.
3. The learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner, under the impression that the open competitive recruitment process as mentioned in Rule 3(2) of the Rules amounts to written examination, has filed this writ petition. The learned Additional Advocate General has clarified that the Government of Tamil Nadu has issued certain directions as to the manner in which the recruitment process has to be conducted, vide G.O.Ms.No.198, Rural Development Panchayati Raj (E5) Department, dated 04.09.2025. As per this Government Order, the Panchayat Secretaries will be selected based on the evaluation of the marks obtained in 10th standard public examination and interview. This G.O. also prescirbes that 85% marks to be awarded based on the marks obtained in the 10th standard public examination and 15% marks to be awarded for interview. The evaluation of the marks is also prescribed in clause VII of the said G.O.
4. With regard to the interview also, the learned Additional Advocate General clarified the manner in which the interview marks are awarded as per clause X of the said G.O. Therefore, according to the learned Additional Advocate General, the selection process has been conducted in a proper manner and there is no violation in the selection process. He further submits that the petitioner does not fall within the zone of consideration and therefore, he has not been selected.
5. This Court considered the rival submissions made.
6. The petitioner has applied for the post of Village Panchayat Secretaries, pursuant to the notification issued by the District Administration. The selection of Village Panchayat Secretary is made as per the Tamil Nadu Village Panchayat Secretaries (Conditions of Service) Rules, 2023. As per Rule 3 of the Rules, the Village Panchayat Secretaries shall be selected only by direct recruitment and through open competitive recruitment process. The recruitment shall be done by the District Level Committee chaired by the District Collector and consisting of Project Director/Additional Collector (Development), District Rural Development Agency, Assistant Director (Panchayats) and Personal Assistant to Collector (Development) as its members and the recruitment shall be done in the manner as may be ordered by the Government.
7. The Government, vide G.O.Ms.No.198, Rural Development Panchayat Raj Department dated 04.09.2025, have issued guidelines for appointment of Village Panchayat Secretaries, as per the Tamil Nadu Village Panchayat Secretaries (Conditions of Service) Rules, 2023. As per the guidelines issued in the said G.O., the marks obtained in the 10th standard public examination and marks secured during the interview, are the main criteria for selection of the candidates and 85% marks to be awarded for the marks obtained in the 10th standard and 15 marks to be awarded for interview. The evaluation of 10th standard mark is also by calculating the percentage of total marks secured by the candidates. Based on this evaluation, the rank list of the applicants would be published and the candidates would be selected for interview in the ratio of 1:5 in descending order of the merit list for the total vacancies allotted in each rotation system. In the event, if there is shortage for 1:5 ratio, total number of candidates applied should be called to participate in the interview.
8. The learned Additional Advcoate General has produced the marks obtained by the petitioner and the cut off marks, which reads as under:
ApplicantName
| Category
| Total Marks obtained in 10th Std.
| WeightageMark (85%)
| Cut off Marks
| Communalcut off weight-age
| Reasons for not shortlisted
| Deva S.
| General
| 410
| 69.7
| 489
| 83.13
| Below the cut off marks
|
9. Admittedly, the petitioner has obtained marks below the cut off marks and he does not fall within the zone of consideration. Therefore, he is not eligible for participating in the interview. However, the rank list as mandated in the above said guideliness, has not been published in the district websites and therefore, the petitioner under the misconception that he is also eligible for attending interview, has filed this writ petition.
10. This Court has also verified from the learned Additional Advocate General, whether the general rank lists were published in the Tamil Nadu Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department's website as per clause VIII of the said Government Order which reads as under:
“VIII. Publication of Rank List of Applicants
1.On completion of the above procedure, the general rank list would be prepared and published in the descending order based on the marks and after considering roster basis against the vacancy declared.
2.The general rank list would be published in the tnrd website with separate page for each district.
.......”
11. The officials, who are instructing the learned Additional Advocate General claim that now, they have uploaded the rank lists.
12. The purpose of uploading rank list on the website is to ensure transparency and provide clarity to the applicants. This litigation could have been prevented, if the respondents published the rank list in the website as per the government order. The petitioner has scored 410 marks in 10th standard and he is also a graduate. Even then, he has applied for the post of Village Panchayat Secretaries, for which 10th standard is the qualification, due to his family circumstances. The petitioner is made to file this writ petition without even knowing his rank due to the lapse on the part of the respondents in uploading the rank lists. The respondents have uploaded the rank list only after the petitioner approached this Court.
13. It is a settled position that this court can impose reasonable costs considering the conduct of the parties to the litigation and the manner in which the litigation has arisen. As discussed above, this litigation could have been avoided, had the respondents published the rank list as per the government order. In light of the same, this court, while dismissing this writ petition, imposes a cost of Rs.5,000/-,(Rs.Five Thousand), which shall be paid by the Government to the petitioner towards litigation expenses, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
|
| |
