Numerals Inserted In Provision For Illustrative Clarity, Cannot Override The Provision Itself: Madras HC Holds 1-Year PG Degree Valid For Recruitment

The Madras High Court recently observed that numeric illustrations inserted in a provision for clarity and as abundant caution could not add, modify or override the provision itself. Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy thus ruled that the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission could not hold a Master of Library and Information Science degree as an invalid degree merely because it was of one-year duration and the same would be a pedantic approach. “The purpose of the rule is to eliminate the candidates possessing a direct Post-Graduate without even these basic qualifications and it is not concerned with the duration of the Post-Graduate course. Therefore, the approach adopted by the respondent TNPSC is an incorrect reading of the rule and the petitioner is entitled to succeed on this score also,” the court said. The court was hearing a petition by K. Paranthaman, challenging TNPSC's refusal to consider his postgraduate qualification and thus not selecting him for the post of Typist. The TNPSC had issued a notification for direct recruitment to various posts including Typist. While applying for the post, Paranthaman could only upload one postgraduate degree in the online application form and he uploaded the MLIS degree. He was thus unable to upload his MBA degree. Though he was issued a call letter to attend the certificate verification/counseling, the TNPSC concluded that Paranthaman's postgraduate degree was invalid and further refused to consider his MBA degree which was of a two-year duration. Thus, he had approached the High Court. Paranthaman argued that he possessed a valid Post-Graduate degree which was obtained after his undergraduate degree and also had an MBA degree. He contended that when he had more than one postgraduate qualification, the authority ought to have treated him as possessing a Post-Graduate qualification and should not have rejected his candidature on mere hyper-technicality. The TNPSC, on the other hand, relied on Clause 25(Explanation-I) (C) of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act 2016 as per which a candidate should have obtained a post-graduate degree, after completion of SSLC, Higher Secondary Course and a degree (10+2+3+2 or 3). Thus, it was contended that unless the Post Graduate degree was for a duration of 2 or 3 years, it was not invalid, It was also submitted that being a recruiting agency, TNPSC was to go by the Act and the rules and had no authority to decide the equivalency of the qualification or relax any qualification. The court relied on the decision of the Apex Court in Dolly Chhanda v Chairman, JEE and Ors wherein the Apex Court had held that as far as production of proof of educational qualification was concerned, the authority could relax the rules. The court noted that since Paranthaman possessed an MBA qualification and was unable to upload the same, the authority ought to have relaxed the matter of submission of proof and considered the MBA degree to select him to the concerned post. The court further noted that even otherwise, the statute did not lay down that the Post-Graduate degree had to be of two year or three year period and the numerals were given in brackets only to provide illustrative clarity. The court added that the only intention of the provision was that the candidate should have undergone 12 years of school education, followed by a valid undergraduate degree before joining the post-graduate degree. The court thus held that the TNPSC's approach was an incorrect reading of the rule and Paranthaman was entitled to succeed. The court thus directed the authorities to appoint Paranthaman to the post entitling him to al the benefits of service. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.G.Sankaran, Senior Counsel, Asst. by Mr.S.Nedunchezhiyan Counsel for the Respondent: Mrs.G.Hema, Standing Counsel for TNPSC, Mr.Stalin Abhimanyu, Additional Government Pleader Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 253 Case Title: K Paranthaman v The Secretary, TNPSC Case No: W.P.No.107 of 2022Click here to read/download the judgment

Numerals Inserted In Provision For Illustrative Clarity, Cannot Override The Provision Itself: Madras HC Holds 1-Year PG Degree Valid For Recruitment

Upasana Sajeev

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Upasana Sajeev

Numerals Inserted In Provision For Illustrative Clarity, Cannot Override The Provision Itself: Madras HC Holds 1-Year PG Degree Valid For Recruitment

Upasana Sajeev

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Upasana Sajeev

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers