MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT:

MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT:

வேலைவாய்ப்பக சீனியாரிட்டி அடிப்படையில் முதுகலை ஆசிரியர்கள் நியமனம் கோரிய மனு தள்ளுபடி.வேலைவாய்ப்பக சீனியாரிட்டி அடிப்படையில் முதுகலை ஆசிரியர்கள் நியமனம் கோரிய மனு தள்ளுபடி.

DETAILS OF JUDJEMENT

Pommakkal ... Petitioner

Vs.

The Teachers Recruitment Board,... Respondent

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of Indiapraying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for therecords relating to the impugned order dated Nil issued by the respondent andquash the same as illegal and consequentially to direct the respondent toconsider the petitioner for appointment to thepost of Graduate Assistant(History) for the year 2009 - 2010 taking into account the seniority of thepetitioner in the Employment Exchange.

:ORDER

The petitioner originally had Undergraduate Degree in Home Science andB.Ed. Degree. She registered the same on the file of the local EmploymentExchange on 17.12.1987. Subsequently, she secured B.A. Degree in History inthe year 2006. Thereafter, she registered the same in the month of December2006. Subsequently, she secured M.A. Degree in History in the year 2009.During the year 2006, several names were sponsored by the local EmploymentExchange in Madurai District, for appointment as Post Graduate Assistant inHistory. But the petitioner was not considered for being sponsored, becausethe petitioner did not come within the zone ofconsideration. Subsequently,during the year 2009-2010, another Recruitment Notification was issued and atthat time, the petitioner was called for certificate verification. But shewas not selected. Therefore, she is before this Court with this writpetition, seeking a direction to direct the respondent to consider thepetitioner for appointment to the post of Graduate Assistant (History) forthe year 2009-2010 taking into account the seniority of the petitioner in theEmployment Exchange.

2.In the counter filed by the respondent, it is stated that thepetitioner suffers two disqualifications and therefore, she was not selected.The first one is that, B.A. Degree in History had been done by her in one-year period. According to the respondent, B.A.Degree obtained withoutundergoing a course for three full years, cannot be considered forappointment. This has been held so by this Court and the same has beenconfirmed by the Division Bench. The seconddisqualification is, the cut-offdate for Most Backward (Women) Communal Turn, is 04.10.1990. As on04.10.1990, the petitioner had neither B.A. History qualification, nor M.A.History Post Graduate Degree. Therefore, as on the cut-off date, she was notqualified for appointment.

3.Only for the above reasons, she was not selected. For the saidaction, I do not find any infirmity warranting interference by this Court.Thus, I do not find any merit in this writ petition.

4.In the result, the writ petition fails and accordingly the same isdismissed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Nocosts.