(Prayer: Writ Appeal No.2751 of 2022 filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order dated 16.02.2022 in W.P.No.10639 of 2020.

Writ Appeal No.53 of 2023 filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order dated 16.02.2022 in W.P.No.10646 of 2020.

Writ Appeal No.54 of 2023 filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order dated 16.02.2022 in W.P.No.15472 of 2020.

Writ Appeal No.61 of 2023 filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order dated 16.02.2022 in W.P.No.10939 of 2020.

Writ Appeal No.64 of 2023 filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order dated 16.02.2022 in W.P.No.10945 of 2020.

Writ Appeal No.2399 of 2022 filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order dated 16.02.2022 in W.P.No.10639 of 2020.

Writ Appeal No.2437 of 2022 filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order dated 16.02.2022 in W.P.No.10945 of 2020.

Writ Appeal No.2546 of 2022 filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order dated 16.02.2022 in W.P.No.15472 of 2020.

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the 2nd respondent from reserving any posts of Field Assistant (Trainee) in the 2nd respondent for inter-caste marriage candidates on priority basis under clause 11(7) of the Notification No.5/2020 dated 19.03.2020 and consequently, direct the 2nd respondent to select candidates for the post of Field Assistant (Trainee) under Notification No.5/2020 strictly following the vertical reservation under Act 45 of 1994 read with Section 27 of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016 and the horizontal reservation only for 30% of Women candidates coming under Section 26 of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions and Service) Act, 2016 and 4% for persons with disability under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 and 20% reservation for persons who studied in Tamil Medium under Act 40 of 2010.)

S.M. Subramaniam, J.

1. Under assail is the common writ order dated 16.02.2022 passed in a batch of writ petitions. These Intra-Court appeals have been instituted by the "Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited" [hereinafter "TANGEDCO" for the sake of brevity], the respondent in writ petitions as well as by writ petitioners, raising different grounds for setting aside the common writ order under challenge.

2. The facts, in brief, are that a recruitment notification No.01/2016 dated 28.02.2016 was issued by the TANGEDCO for selection and appointment to the posts of Technical Assistant / Electrical, Technical Assistant / Mechanical, Assistant Draughtsman and Field Assistant (Trainee). Pursuant to the recruitment notification, the process of selection commenced and concluded for the post of Field Assistant on 29.01.2018 and for the post of Technical Assistant on 01.04.2019. Admittedly, the writ petitions have been instituted on 31.07.2020 and 15.10.2020, after completion of the selection process in all respects.

3. Mrs.Nalini Chidambaram, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the candidates, who participated in the selection process, would mainly contend that inter-caste marriage quota has not been contemplated either under the Rules or under the recruitment notification and that being so, the TANGEDCO had provided an inter-caste marriage quota to few candidates, which caused prejudice to the interests of other candidates, including the writ petitioners. That apart, the writ petitioners came to know about the inter-caste marriage quota provided by the TANGEDCO only after completion of the selection process, since under the recruitment notification, no such quota had been contemplated. Thus, the writ petitioners had no occasion to challenge the recruitment notification at the first instance and therefore, the writ Court ought to have considered all the grounds raised by the petitioners, which was not done, resulting in the filing of the present intra-court appeals.

4. The learned Senior Counsel would urge this Court by stating that the inter-caste marriage quota has not been contemplated under the recruitment rules. While so, providing any quota for inter-caste marriage caused infringement of the rights of the candidates, who participated in the open competitive process. Thus, the quota for inter-caste marriage provided is unconstitutional and violative of the recruitment rules. Thus, the selection ought to have been declared unconstitutional and the process ought to be conducted afresh.

5. The learned Standing Counsel for the TANGEDCO, would oppose by stating that the writ petitions were filed after completion of the selection process and thus, the same are not maintainable. There is no separate quota / reservation provided for inter-caste marriage candidates. Priority is given following the horizontal system of reservation and therefore, there is no quota earmarked for inter-caste marriage candidates. Thus, the grounds raised based on certain perceptions are incorrect and the writ Court though held that the writ petitions are not maintainable, but issued directions which resulted in revising the selection process and therefore, the TANGEDCO also preferred intra-Court appeals.

6. As regards the brief facts about the dispute concerning inter-caste marriage priority quota, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.1064, Public Services Department dated 16.03.1956 providing priority to inter-caste marriage persons. The system of providing such priority quota in the recruitment was followed till the year 2022 and thereafter, the entire recruitment process has been handed over to the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, wherein no such priority has been provided to intercaste marriage persons. From the year 2022 onwards, even the priority is not available to inter-caste marriage persons and such priority has been dispensed with. Till such time, providing priority in the recruitment had been followed based on the Government Orders, but there was no reservation provided for inter-caste marriage persons. The priority is given following the horizontal system of reservation, which cannot be construed as a separate quota for inter-caste marriage persons and thus, the selection process was conducted in accordance with the recruitment rules as well as the Government Orders providing priority quota not only to inter-caste marriage candidates, but also to the other priority candidates falling under various categories.

7. The recruitment notification would show that the priority quota has been provided to Disabled Ex-serviceman, Dependent of Ex-serviceman killed / Disabled in action, Destitute Widow, Ex-serviceman / dependents of serving personnel of Ex-serviceman, Intercaste Marriage, Repatriate (Country), Member of the family whose lands acquired by the Government, Dependents of Freedom Fighters and Retrenched.

8. In the recruitment notification, clause 5(x) stipulates that as per G.O.No.142, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department dated 14.10.2009, selection will be made as per 1:4 ratio in regard to priority and non-priority candidates. Therefore, priority quota has been allotted generally to all candidates falling under priority category and there is no separate reservation for inter-caste marriage persons.

9. This is amplified through the selection list extracted in the writ order and perusal of the said selection list would show that there is no separate quota / reservation has been provided for inter-caste marriage persons, but priority has been granted to the extent as stated in the notification and with reference to the Government Order. However, even the said priority quota for inter-caste marriage persons has been stopped from the year 2022 onwards and currently, the recruitment process has been undertaken by the TNPSC for recruitment to the TANGEDCO.

10. The writ petitioners are unable to establish before this Court that reservation has been exclusively provided to inter-caste marriage persons nor that selection has been made based on any such reservation. But priority has been given along with all other priority candidates as per the recruitment notification, which cannot be construed as an exclusive reservation assigned to inter-caste marriage persons. Thus, the very basis of the writ petitions, namely that reservation was provided for intercaste marriage persons, has not been established nor this Court is able to identify from the selection list any such exclusive reservation. In the absence of any such specific ground raised in the recruitment process, the High Court may not be in a position to undo the selection process which had already been concluded in April 2019.

11. Pertinently, the writ petitions were filed after completion of the selection process. The reason stated is that there was no reservation provided in the recruitment notification and thus, the writ petitioners were unaware of the same. However, this Court finds that no reservation has been provided for inter-caste marriage persons either in the recruitment notification nor any such reservation is identifiable in the selection process.

12. Perusal of the common impugned order would show that in paragraph No.44, learned single Judge has made an observation that the writ petitioners have not challenged the notification No.1/2016 dated 28.02.2016 and therefore, the writ petitions are not maintainable. However, the writ Court was also not able to identify any candidate who was selected exclusively by providing reservation under the inter-caste marriage quota. While so, directions have been issued in paragraph Nos.84 and 85 which would unsettle the recruitment process already concluded, which is not desirable.

13. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the common impugned order dated 16.02.2022 is set aside. Accordingly, W.A.Nos.2751 of 2022, 53 of 2023, 54 of 2023, 61 of 2023, 64 of 2023 stand allowed and W.A.Nos. 2399 of 2022, 2437 of 2022 and 2546 of 2022 stand dismissed.

14. In view of the common judgment passed hereinabove, W.P.No.5906 of 2021 deserves no merit consideration and accordingly, the same stands dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs.