Facts
The petitioner applied pursuant to Notification Nos. 72 and 73 of 2025 dated 06.04.2025 for the posts of Chobdar, Office Assistant, Residential Assistant and Room Boy in the Madras High Court Service.
Source reference: p.2; para. 2The notification prescribed a minimum qualification of a pass in VIII Standard and a maximum qualification of Higher Secondary (+2), and required candidates to undertake that they were neither possessing nor pursuing any higher qualification as on the date of submitting the application.
Source reference: p.2; para. 2The petitioner cleared the written examination but was disqualified before the skill test and certificate verification on the ground that she was overqualified because she had pursued a B.Com. course.
Source reference: p.2; paras. 2–3Her Transfer Certificate showed that she joined the first year of the B.Com. course on 11.07.2022 and discontinued it on 21.06.2023.
Source reference: p.3; paras. 4–5She submitted her recruitment application on 06.04.2025.
Source reference: p.3; paras. 4–5Issues
Whether the petitioner was disqualified under Clause 4(B) of the recruitment notification merely because she had previously pursued a B.Com. course, despite having discontinued it before submitting her application?
Source reference: p.3; paras. 5–7Whether the rejection of the petitioner’s candidature on the ground of possessing a higher educational qualification was legally sustainable when she possessed only the Higher Secondary qualification and was not pursuing any higher course on 06.04.2025?
Source reference: p.4; paras. 7–8Law Applied
The Court applied Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the eligibility conditions contained in Clause 4(B) of Notification Nos. 72 and 73 of 2025 dated 06.04.2025.
Source reference: p.3; para. 6Under Clause 4(B), a candidate must satisfy two distinct requirements as on the date of submitting the application: first, the candidate must not possess a qualification higher than Higher Secondary (+2); and second, the candidate must not be pursuing any higher qualification other than Higher Secondary or its equivalent.
Source reference: p.3; para. 6The Court treated these as separate conditions and held that previous pursuit of a higher course, by itself, does not amount to disqualification where the course had been discontinued before the relevant application date.
Source reference: p.4; para. 7Reasoning
The Court examined the wording of Clause 4(B) and distinguished between possessing a higher qualification and pursuing a higher qualification on the date of application.
Source reference: p.3; para. 6The petitioner admittedly had not acquired or possessed any qualification higher than Higher Secondary.
Source reference: p.4; para. 7Although she had enrolled in the B.Com. course in 2022, the Transfer Certificate established that she discontinued the course on 21.06.2023, well before the application date of 06.04.2025.
Source reference: p.4; para. 7Accordingly, she was neither possessing a higher qualification nor pursuing one when she submitted her application.
Source reference: p.4; para. 7The respondents therefore incorrectly applied the disqualification relating to candidates pursuing higher education, and the rejection of her candidature was contrary to the express terms of the notification.
Source reference: p.4; para. 7Holding
The Madras High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the rejection of the petitioner’s candidature bearing Registration No. 25720071001, which had been rejected under the category “Possessing Higher Educational Qualification” by order dated 06.07.2026.
The respondents were directed to permit the petitioner to participate in the further stages of the selection process in accordance with the recruitment notification and the applicable service rules.
Source reference: p.4; para. 8No order as to costs was made.
Source reference: p.4; para. 8Original Court PDF
J.PAVITHRAvsThe Registrar General
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
