M.Sengottaiyan v. The State of Tamilnadu

W.P.Nos.2a441oofo202a,oa28a,o4006,oo6002o&o9919oofo2022 INoTHEoHIGHoCOURToOFoJUDICATUREoAToMADRAS DATED : 15..09..2023 Coram THEoHON'BLEoMRoJUSTICEoN.SATHISHoKUMAR WritoPetitionoNos.23441oofo2023,o o3283,o4006,o6002o&o9919oofo2022 ando W.M.P.Nos.22971,o22972,o22973oofo2023,oo3412,o3413,o3414,o3415 4149,o4151,o4153,o4154,o6090,o6093,o6094,o6095,o6096, o9638,o9639,o9640,o9641o&o9642oofo2022 ..... W.P.No.23441oofo2023o

1.oM.Sengottaiyan

2.oV.GayathrioDevi

3.N.Nithiyanandhan

4.D.Suganyadevi

5.R.Balasaravanan

6.J.Rekha

7.S.Kumar

8.N.Sivakumar

9.M.Sivaraman

10.M.Vanitha

11.D.Amudha

12.V.P.LuyusicoBarathi

13.A.Balamurugan ..... Petitioners -Versus-

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.

2.The Commissioner of School Education, Directorate of School Education, DPI Complex, College Road, Chennai 600006.

3.Teachers Recruitment Board, Rep. by its Member Secretary, EVK Sampath Maaligai, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006. ..... Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent who is the appointment authortiy for the post of Post Graduate Assistant as per Tamil Nadu Higher Secondary Education Service to issue appointment orders to the petitioners who wrote the PG TRB exam and attended the Certificate Verification pursuant to Notification No.10/2019 dated 12.0.2019 issued by the 3rd respondent as PG Assistants against the estimated vacancies for the year 2019-20 in the subjects Zoology (1), English (2), Mathematics (2) , Economics (1) and History (7) and consequently forbear the 3rd respondent from appointing candidates for the post of PG Assistants in School Education Department pursuant to Notification No.01/2021, dated 09.09.2021 before appointing the petitioners to the post of 2 of 31 Graduate Assistants pursuant to Notification No.10/2019, dated 12.06.2019 for the year 2019-20. For Petitioner(s) : Mrs.Nalini Chidambaram, Senior Counsel for Mr.Kanchi Kailasam in all WPs For Respondent (s) : Mr.P.Baladhandayutham, Special Government Pleader for RR1 & 2 in all WPs Mr.R.Neelakandan, Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.C.Kathiravan, Standing Counsel for R3 in all WPs 3 of 31 W.P.No.3283 of 2022

1.D.Paranthaman

2.R.Pandi

3.J.Sampath

4.M.Sudhakar

5.D.Mohana Sundaram

6.R. Revathi

7.N.Thilagavathi

8.S.P.Chitra

9.V.Shanthi

10.S. Revathi Subashini

11.P.Rajesh

12.P. Shanthi

13.K.Vanitha

14.P.Velanganni

15.G.Manigandan

16.T.Vikram

17.G.Abirami

18.M.Vashanthi

19.S.Sweety

20.M.Thangadurai

21.M.Maripandi Manikandan

22.S.Ahilandeswari

23.M.Subathirai

24.K.R.Rajakumari 4 of 31

25.N.Bharathi

26.T.Savitha

27.T.Premalatha

28.S.Sadhan Dhev

29.R.Sakthivel

30.C.Kamalesan

31.D.Linga Kumar

32.V.Shankar

33.S.Prabhu

34.R. Mohana

35.C.Revathy

36.V.Anitha

37.M.Senthil Kumar

38.P.Sonia

39.O.Lalitha

40.P.Myvizhi

41.D. Thenmozhi

42.D.Vasudevan

43.N.Malar

44.S.A.Buvanesshwari

45.R.Ambika

46.R.Tamizharasi

47.B.Vasanthi

48.C.Rajeswari

49.R.Vasanthakumari 5 of 31

50.T.Manjula

51.K.Velmurugan

52.G.Pargunan

53.M.Muthappan

54.P.Kavitha

55.V.Panneerselvam

56.K.Kohla

57.C Kalavathi

58.B.Gokulapriya

59.M.Jayapal

60.P. Priya Gandhi

61.M.Sudhakar

62.M.Deepanchakkravarthy

63.M.Thirumal

64.V.Nandhini

65.C.Clament Christanson

66.A.Sentamil Elakkia

67.S. Dinesh Kumar aged

68.M.Sureshkumar

69.S.Achudha

70.R. Sasikumar

71.N.Kasthuri Rachel

72.D.Chitra

73.B. Nithyadevi

74.R.Guruvalakshmi

75.A.Senthamil Elakkiya 6 of 31

76.A.Kowsalya

77.M.Thirumal

78.A.Thiyagu

79.S.Dhaarani

80.A.Sithara

81.S.Alosia Vimala Mary

82.M.Angeline Priyalatha

83.P.Rajalakshmi.

84.K.Kalidas

85.S.Kalaiarasi

86.G.Elumalai

87.M.Poongodi

88.M.Varalakshmi

89.M.Priyanka

90.S.Sundaravadivel

91.K.Ramar

92.A.Ajithkumar

93.S. Antony Dominic Christopher

94.P.Ilamurugan

95.R.Kavitha

96.C.Mohanalakshmi

97.P.Arjunan

98.R.Neelamekam

99.A.Kohila

100.K.Ashok Kumar

101.S.Prema 7 of 31

102.P.Tamilselvi

103.C.Thirugnanamoorthi

104.J.Jeyamani

105.S.Ramkumar

106.G.Gnanaseviyar

107.K.Gawaskar

108.E.Babu

109.S.Vannimuthu

110.V.Arulselvi

111.M. Ramya

112.P.Balu

113.D.Rajpal

114.M.Balamurugan

¶115P.Vasanthakumari

116.M.Raja Murugan

117.S.Vijayalakshmi

118.M.Sumathi

119.S.Parimala

120.V.Rajavelu

121.K.Kalavathi

122.K.Sathishkumar

123.A.Annadhajothi

124.A.Chinnadurai

125.P.Selvaraju

126.P.Arulselvi

127.J.Lalitha 8 of 31

128.S.Nagarajan

129.L.Packiyalakshmi

130.S.Rajamani

131.V.Premakumari

132.K.Krishnakumari

133.R.Deepa

134.Santhanalakshmi

135.L.Kavitha

136.S. Baby

137.S.Rajivgandhi

138.T.Chelladurai

139.K.Kumar

140.D.Maheswari

141.M.Manju

142.E.Sangeetha

143.R.Vijayarangan

144.Ravikumar

145.N.Kannan

146.A.Manimozhi

147.V.Shanmugaraju

148.K. Prakasam

149.R.Ramamoorthy

150.P.Karthikeyan

151.N.Vasudevan

152.A.Karthikai Lakshmi

153.R.Ayyappan 9 of 31

154.K.Pandiselvi

155.P. Prabhu

156.M.Nagoor Meera

157.R.Chitra

158.V.Pushpalatha

159.R.Sathish .. Petitioners vs

1.The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The Commissioner of School Education, Directorate of School Education, DPI Complex, College Road, Chennai - 600 006.

3.Teachers Recruitment Board Rep. by its Chairman, EVK Sampath Maaligai, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai - 600 006. .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd Respondent who is the appointing authority for the post of PG Assistants as per Tamil Nadu Higher Secondary Education Service to issue appointment orders to the Petitioners who wrote the PG TRB exam and attended the Certificate Verification pursuant to Notification No.10/2019 dated 12.06.2019 issued by the 3rd Respondent as PG Assistants against the estimated vacancies for the year 2019-20 and consequently forbear the 3rd Respondent from appointing candidates for the 10 of 31 post of PG Assistants in School Education Department pursuant to Notification No.01/2021 dated 09.09.2021 before appointing the Petitioners to the posts of PG Assistants pursuant to Notification No.10/2019, dated 12.06.2019 for the year 2019-20. W.P.No.4006 of 2022

1.S.Muthuraj

2.K.Pandiselvi

3.S.Savuri

4.D.Kalaiselvan

5.P.Krishnaveni

6.R.Selvi Kumari

7.N.Senthilkumar

8.M.Umaselvi

9.S.Navaneetha Raja

10.M.Nirmaladevi

11.R.Saraladevi

12.D.Vimala

13.K Gunasekaran

14.R.Govindammal

15.A.Vanitha

16.A.Murugalakshmi

17.P.Logeshwari

18.P.Hemalatha

19.R.Vadivel

20.M.Akneeshwari 11 of 31

21.P.Gundurao

22.S.Sharrulathaa

23.S.Elamathy

24.P. Kavitha

25.K.Vediyappan

26.G.Bhuvaneswari

27.M.Prabhu

28.K.Jamuna

29.S.Subathra

30.N.Priya

31.V.Kalai Selvi

32.M.Nirmala

33.K.Periya Karuppan

34.R. Vimal

35.T.Rajeswari

36.K.Vasantha

37.D.Anandhi

38.S.Periyasamy

39.P.Savithiri

40.D.Vidhya

¶41K.Vanitha

42.V.Rathika

43.V.Sangeetha Devi

44.G.Backiyalakshmi

45.M. Vasanthi

46.J.Ezhil 12 of 31

47.A.Venkatesan

48.R.Bharathi

49.A.Thirumurugan

50.S.Bhuvaneshwari

51.P.Pitchaiyammal Devi

52.R.Harigaran

53.P.Vimala

54.M.Kamarnabisha

55.S.Mynoortheen

56.M.Vedha

57.R.Subayadav

58.N.Dhanalakshmi

59.S.Nithya

60.S.Latha Shree

61.V.Thangamani

62.P.Asvini

63.U.Suganya Devi

64.V.K.Manimaran

65.P.Deepan

66.K.Savitha

67.N.T.Deepa

68.P.Srinivasan

69.K.Kalaiyarasi

70.P.Ashokan

71.S.Sivaprakash

72.Sakunthaladevi 13 of 31

73.D.Rubella

74.P.Karthika

75.N. Saranya

76.V .Karthik

77.K Palani

78.C.Tamizhselvan

79.M.Udayakumar

80.S.Hemalatha

81.N.Anitha

82.P.Seenidurai

83.R.Senthil Kumar

84.S.K.Vasantha Kumar

85.S.Sanjeevi

86.N.Nirmalkumar

87.A.Revathi

88.M.Anbarasan

89.P.Sathishkumar

90.C.Geetha

91.K.Palani

92.V.Indhumathi

93.M.Ezhilarasi

94.R.Kavitha

95.K.S.Sangeetha

96.M.Mugeshkumar

97.I.Sathya

98.G.Usha 14 of 31

99.G.Chitra

100.V.Jamunarani

101.R.Dhiwakar

102.M. Kanimozhi

103.S.Viji

104.A.Poobalan

105.S.Sathya

106.T.Sundari

107.S.Rajesh

108.A.Manjula

109.K.Punitha

110.M.Subbulakshmi

111.D.Senthil

112.N.Ambiga

113.N.Sambamoorthi

114.P.Saranya

115.S.Natarajan

116.J.Praveen Kumar

117.G Mari

118.V. Dhanabal .. Petitioners -Versus-

1.The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Fort. St.George, Chennai 600 009. 15 of 31

2.The Commissioner of School Education, Directorate of School Education, DPI Complex, College Road, Chennai 600 006.

3.Teachers Recruitment Board Rep. by its Chairman, EVK Sampath Maaligai, DPI Campus,College Road, Chennai - 600 006. .. Respondents Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd Respondent who is the appointing authority for the post of PG Assistants as per Tamil Nadu Higher Secondary Education Service to issue appointment orders to the Petitioners who wrote the PG TRB exam and attended the Certificate Verification pursuant to Notification No.10/2019 dated 12.06.2019 issued by the 3rd Respondent as PG Assistants against the estimated vacancies for the year 2019-20 and consequently forbear the 3rd Respondent from appointing candidates for the post of PG Assistants in School Education Department pursuant to Notification No.01/2021 dated 09.09.2021 before appointing the Petitioners to the posts of PG Assistants pursuant to Notification No.10/2019 dated

12.06.2019 for the year 2019 – 20. 16 of 31 For Petitioner : Mrs.Nalini Chidambaram, Senior Counsel for Ms.C.Uma For Respondent (s) : Mr.P.Baladhandayutham, Special Government Pleader for RR1 & 2 Mr.R.Neelakandan, Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.C.Kathiravan, Standing Counsel for R3 W.P.No.6002 of 2022

1.R.Jayapriya

2.M Palanichamy

3.M.Vijayaprabhakar

4.P.Suguna

5.L.Chandra

6.V.Nandhini

7.B.Manjula

8.S.Anandha Murugan

9.A.Arokkiya Selvaraj

10.T.Kiruba

11.M.Sudhakar

12.V. Elumalai

13.M.Gracy

14.P.Vasanthi

15.G.Mayakrishnan 17 of 31

16.M.R.Suhitha

17.D.Jayaprakash

18.M.Mohammad Shakul

19.B.Anandhi

20.S.Radha

21.V.Rukmani

22.C.Ambika

23.R.Rajasekar

24.P.Subramani

25.M.Selvaraj

26.V.Nandhakumar

27.R.Nagalakshmi

28.S.Saranya

29.F.George Anand

30.N.Babu

31.S.Sathishkumar

32.R.Shanmugam

33.S.Priya

34.V Sathish Kumar

¶35R.Paneerselvam

36.P.T. Suvarna Kumar

37.V.Yasotha

38.J.Sampath

39.K.Murugavel

40.S.K.Vivetha

41.N.Sakthinathan 18 of 31

42.B.Aneeba

43.B.Senthilkumar

44.K Manikandan

45.S.Sathiskannan

46.S Kanniyappan

47.D.Selvarani

48.G.Anguraj

49.M Nithya

50.D.Kavitha

51.R Jayalakshmi

52.R.Ayyappan

53.S.Sakkanan

54.I.Anitha

55.L.Kanagumani

56.M.Prakash

57.S.Mahendran

58.S.Dharani

59.R.Tamilarasan

60.T.Balasubramaniyam

61.R.Elavarasan

62.S.Santhi

63.M.Viswanathan

64.P.Anbu

65.C.Senthil Kumar

66.R.Murugan

67.K.Gopalakrishnan 19 of 31

68.K.N.Abirami

69.V.Shankar

70.N.Bharathi

71.C. Ponnusamy

72.R.Velayutham

73.V.Hemalatha

74.K.Selvam

75.P.Manimekalai

76.D.Latha

77.K.L Keerthana

78.A Balamurugan

79.P.L.Meenakshi

80.K.Prabu

81.S.Kumaravel

82.G.Muthusamy

83.C.Adhikalaivani

84.S.Arivazhagan

85.V.Kumar

86.K.Poongodi

87.J.Rohini

88.M.Vijayaragavan

89.A Jayashri

90.P.Sivaranjini

91.A.Sugumar

92.R.Vidya

93.M.Kasirajan 20 of 31

94.K.Venkatesan

95.D.Archana

96.M.Ramya

97.A.Poornima

98.N.Kavitha

99.D.Nirmala

100.K.Saranya

101.K. Mahesh Ramu

102.R.Dhanasekari

103.T.Ramachandran ... Petitioners -Versus-

1.The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The Commissioner of School Education, Directorate of School Education, DPI Complex, College Road, Chennai - 600 006.

3.Teachers Recruitment Board Rep. by its Chairman, EVK Sampath Maaligai, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai - 600 006. .. Respondents Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent who is the appointing authority for the post of PG Assistants as per Tamil Nadu Higher Secondary 21 of 31 Education Service to issue appointment orders to the petitioners who wrote the PG TRB Exam and attended the Certificate Pursuant to Notification No. 10/2019 dated 12.06.2019 issued by the 3rd respondent as PG Assistants against the estimated vacancies for the year 2019-20 and consequently forbear the 3rd respondent from appointing candidates for the post of PG Assistants in School Education Department pursuant to Notification No.01/2021 dated

9.9.2021 before appointing the petitioners to the post of PG Assistant pursuant to Notification No.10/2019 dated 12.06.2019 for the year 2019 – 20. For Petitioner : Mrs.Nalini Chidambaram, Senior Counsel for Ms.C.Uma For Respondent (s) : P.Baladhandayutham, Special Government Pleader for RR1 & 2 Mr.R.Neelakandan, Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.C.Kathiravan,

Standing Counsel for R3 W.P.No.9919 of 2022

1.V.Durgadevi

2.K.Nirmala

3.V.Hariharasuthan

4.N.Murali

5.M.Kasirajan

6.G.Sureka

7.S.Venkateshwari

8.J.Parameshwaran 22 of 31

9.A.Jayanthi

10.S.Nithyapriya

11.S.Paramasivan

12.A.Jothi

13.R.Rajadurai

14.L.Kayamboomeni

15.M.Nithya

16.V.Nithya

17.S.Veerapandiyan

18.R.Kalavathy

19.C.Chithra

20.R.Manikumari

21.R.Pachaiyappan ..... Petitioners -Versus-

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.

2.The Commissioner of School Education, Directorate of School Education, DPI Complex, College Road, Chennai 600 006.

3.Teachers Recruitment Board, Rep. by its Chairman, EVK Sampath Maaligai, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006. ..... Respondents 23 of 31 Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd Respondent, who is the appointing authority for the post of PG Assistants as per Tamil Nadu Higher Secondary Education Service to issue appointment orders to the Petitioners who wrote the PG/TRB exam and attended the Certificate Verification pursuant to Notification No.10/2019 dated 12.06.2019 issued by the 3rd Respondent as PG Assistants against the estimated vacancies for the year 2019-20 and consequently forbear the 3rd Respondent from appointing candidates for the post of PG Assistants in School Education Department pursuant to Notification No.01/2021 dated 09.09.2021 before appointing the petitioners to the posts of PG Assistants pursuant to Notification No.10/2019 dated

12.06.2019 for the year 2019-20. For Petitioner : Mrs.Nalini Chidambaram, Senior Counsel for Ms.C.Uma For Respondent (s) : P.Baladhandayutham, Special Government Pleader for RR1 & 2 Mr.R.Neelakandan, Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.C.Kathiravan, Standing Counsel for R3 24 of 31 COMMON ORDER These writ petitions seek a mandamus directing the Commissioner of School Education, Directorate of School Education, Government of Tamil Nadu, who is the 2nd respondent to appoint the petitioners herein as Post Graduate Assistants under the Tamil Nadu Higher Secondary Education Service based on the examination conducted by the Teachers Recruitment Board (TRB) pursuant to the Notification No.10/2019 dated 12.06.2019 as against the estimated vacancies for the year 2019-20 in various subjects.

¶2The background of the facts which led to the filing of these writ petition in brief are as under:- The petitioners are Post Graduates in different subjects with B.Ed. degree. They are qualified to apply for the post of Post Graduate Assistants of their respective subjects. The Teachers Recruitment Board (TRB) by Notification No.10/2019 dated 12.06.2019 invited applications from the eligible candidates for direct recruitment to the post of Post Graduate Assistant in various subjects and Physical Education Directors Grade-I in School Education Department for the year 2018-19. There were 2144 vacancies notified in the said recruitment process. The petitioners are the unsuccessful 25 of 31 candidates in the said recruitment process.

¶3It is the case of the petitioners that as per proceeding dated

08.01.2021, the Department of School Education, though 578 numbers of backlog vacancies were available, they were not included in the notification. If those backlog vacancies were included they would have been selected in the said Notification itself.

¶4Heard both sides.

¶5The learned senior counsel would submit that if the backlog vacancies

(578) were included in the Notification No.10/2019, they would have been selected as PG Assistants in their respective subjects. Non-inclusion of such backlog vacancies had taken away the rights of the petitioners to be considered for appointment.

¶6The learned Special Government Pleader would, on the other hand, contend that after the recruitment process to fill up the vacancies for the year 2018-19, vide Notification No.10/2019 dated 12.06.2019 was over and vacancies were filled up, at the instance of the State, recruitment process to fill up the vacancies for the year 2020-21 Advertisement No.01/2021 dated

09.09.2021 to fill up 2207 vacancies including 247 backlog vacancies was issued. That recruitment process was also over and and no addendum was 26 of 31 issued at the relevant point of time. The petitioners cannot as a matter of right seek for appointment.

¶7The learned standing counsel for the TRB would submit that they are only a recruiting agency and they had no role in the matter of identifying the vacancies.

¶8This court has considered the rival submissions and perused the records carefully.

¶9Now, the petitioners seek appointment to the post of PG Assistants in various subjects in the Higher Secondary Schools as against 578 backlog vacancies which were estimated and available then, but were left to be included in the recruitment process conducted for the year 2019-20 through Notification No.10/2019 dated 12.06.2019. Admittedly, there had been a subsequent Notification issued on 09.09.2021 through Advertisement No.01/2021, whereunder 2207 including 247 backlog vacancies were sought to be filled up and the recruitment process was completed with the selection of the candidates for all such vacancies.

¶10It is settled law that an aspirant does not have a vested right to the post for which he was admitted to sit for the examination. Having failed to get through in the examination, the petitioners cannot say that had the backlog 27 of 31 vacancies been included in the recruitment process 2018-19 they would have been selected. It is for the government to notify the vacancies and send requisition for any post which has been identified for selection on the said post through the regular recruitment or special recruitment for backlog vacancies through TRB. The Supreme Court has consistenly held that that recruitment of candidates in excess of the notified vacancies, will be violative of Articles 14 and 16 (1) of the Constitution. As such no direction can be given for appointment of any individual on any post which has not been notified nor requisitioned by the State for the said post.

¶11In the case of Rakhi Ray v. High Court of Delhi, (2010) 2 SCC 637, the Supreme Court has held as under:- "7. It is a settled legal proposition that vacancies cannot be filled up over and above the number of vacancies advertised as "the recruitment of the candidates in excess of the notified vacancies is a denial and deprivation of the constitutional right under Article 14 read with Article 16(1) of the Constitution", of those persons who acquired eligibility for the post in question in accordance with the statutory rules subsequent to the date of notification of vacancies. Filling up the vacancies over the notified vacancies is neither permissible nor desirable, for the reason, that it amounts to "improper exercise of 28 of 31 power and only in a rare and exceptional circumstance and in emergent situation, such a rule can be deviated from and such a deviation is permissible only after adopting policy decision based on some rationale", otherwise the exercise would be arbitrary. Filling up of vacancies over the notified vacancies amounts to filling up of future vacancies and thus, is not permissible in law. (Vide Union of India v. Ishwar Singh Khatri [1992 Supp (3) SCC 84 : 1992 SCC (L&S) 999 : (1992) 21 ATC 851] , Gujarat State Dy. Executive Engineers' Assn. v. State of Gujarat [1994 Supp (2) SCC 591 : 1994 SCC (L&S) 1159 : (1994) 28 ATC 78] , State of Bihar v. Secretariat Asstt. Successful Examinees Union 1986 [(1994) 1 SCC 126 : 1994 SCC (L&S) 274 : (1994) 26 ATC 500 : AIR 1994 SC 736] , Prem Singh v. Haryana SEB [(1996) 4 SCC 319: 1996 SCC (L&S) 934] and Ashok Kumar v. Banking Service Recruitment Board [(1996) 1 SCC 283 : 1996 SCC (L&S) 298 : (1996) 32 ATC 235 : AIR 1996 SC 976] .)

¶12Recently in the case of Gajanan Babulal Bansode v. State of Maharashtra, (2021) 4 SCC 494, the Supreme Court has held

¶14The impugned GR seeks to fill up double the number of vacancies which were notified for the LDCE-2016 by the Circular dated 27-6-2016. It is well-settled in service jurisprudence that the authority cannot fill up more than the notified number of vacancies advertised, as the 29 of 31 recruitment of candidates in excess of the notified vacancies, would be violative of Articles 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution of India.

¶13In the light of the settled legal position referred to above and the facts and circumstances of the case, no direction as prayed for by the petitioners in the writ petitions can be granted and the writ petitions deserve only to be dismissed. In the result, the writ petitions are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected WMPs are closed.

15..09..2023 Index : yes / no : yes / no Speaking / Non Speaking Order kmk To

1.The Principal Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.

2.The Commissioner of School Education, Directorate of School Education, DPI Complex, College Road, Chennai 600006.

3.The Member Secretary, Teachers Recruitment Board, EVK Sampath Maaligai, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006. 30 of 31 W.P.Nos.2a441oofo202a,oa28a,o4006,oo6002o&o9919oofo2022 N.SATHISHoKUMAR.J., kmko WritoPetitiono Nos.23441oofo2023,o o3283,o4006,o6002o&o9919oofo2022

15..09..2023oo