‘Tamil’ Is Sine Qua Non For Efficient Discharge Of Duties: Madras HC Dismisses Candidates’ Plea Challenging GO Mandating Minimum 40% Marks In Tamil Eligibility Test
The Madras High Court has upheld the Government Order (‘GO’) issued by the State and the recruitment notification issued by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission which mandated the requirement of 40% marks in the Tamil language in the Group-IV Combined Civil Services Examination.
The Court also observed that the candidates should be able to fluently converse and write in Tamil, which is sine qua non for efficient discharge of duties.
The Bench of Justice G. R. Swaminathan observed, “The Government as employer obviously has the power to prescribe the qualification of the candidates proposed to be selected. As rightly pointed out by the learned Advocate General, persons in Group-IV posts will have to have direct interaction with the people and they ought to have sufficient knowledge in Tamil. They should be able to fluently converse and write in Tamil. This is a sine qua non for efficient discharge of their functions and duties. This can be found out only by making them write the eligibility paper. The employer does not insist that the candidates should secure 100% of marks in the eligibility papers. What is expected is mere pass mark of 40%. The petitioners are not justified in insisting that it is sufficient to pass in Tamil paper alone and that the performance in that paper should be otherwise ignored.”
Senior Advocate Nalini Chidambaram appeared for the Petitioners whereas Advocate General P.S. Raman and Special Government Pleader D. Ravichander appeared for the Respondents.
The Petitioners were candidates eligible to participate in the impending Group-IV Combined Civil Services Examination in which 150 marks were awarded for Part-A for Tamil Language, and they were not proficient in it. The Petitioners, therefore, sought quashing of the impugned GO and Notification as the same was alleged to be illegal, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and opposed to Act 40 of 2010 and Section 21A of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016 (‘Act of 2016’).
Writ petitions were filed challenging the GO, Human Resource Management (M) Department issued by the State of Tamil Nadu and the consequential notification issued by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission.
The Court said that the impugned G.O. was in consonance with Section 21 of the Act of 2016 and the impugned recruitment notification aligned with both.
The Court further held, “A subordinate legislation can be assailed only if it can be shown that it is contrary to constitution or it is ultra vires the parent Act. The petitioners have not been able to demonstrate that the impugned G.O is ultra vires the constitution. The scope of controversy has therefore become limited. So long as the parent provision is occupying the filed, unless the consequential Government Order is shown as ultra vires the parent statute, its validity cannot be questioned.”
The Court also said that the contention that the selection should be based only on performance in Part B of the exam is sans any merit and in matters concerning recruitment, the employer can prescribe the qualifications and unless it is illegal or without jurisdiction, the Court ought not to interfere.
Accordingly, the Court observed that the GO was in consonance with Section 21A of the Act and the writ petitions were sans merits, hence, dismissed.
Cause Title: S Nithesh and Ors. v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors.
Appearances:
Petitioners: Senior Advocate Nalini Chidambaram and Advocate C Uma.
Respondents: Advocate General P.S. Raman and Special Government Pleader D. Ravichander.
