Candidates below the minimum cutoff cannot proceed to further selection, regardless of experience eligibility disputes.

The petitioners applied for the post of Senior Entomologist under TNPSC Notification No. 8 of 2025, appeared for the written examination, and were not called for physical certificate verification or interview.

By consent, the Court directed TNPSC to state whether the petitioners had obtained the minimum cut-off marks; TNPSC supplied their marks in a sealed cover. The Court found that neither petitioner had secured the required minimum cut-off marks.

Whether the petitioners’ claims regarding satisfaction of the experience criteria required consideration when they had not secured the minimum cut-off marks for further selection.

Whether the petitioners could be permitted to participate in certificate verification and interview despite failing to meet the minimum cut-off threshold.

The petitions were brought under Article 226 of the Constitution.

It proceeded on the selection-process threshold that candidates who have not secured the minimum cut-off marks are not eligible for consideration in the further selection stages; accordingly, resolving a separate eligibility dispute would not affect their consideration for selection or appointment.

The Court treated the petitioners’ cut-off marks as decisive. On examining the marks produced by TNPSC, it found that both petitioners fell below the minimum required for further selection.

Therefore, even if their claims concerning experience were accepted, that finding would not enable them to proceed to certificate verification, interview, or consideration for appointment. The experience issue consequently did not need to be decided in these petitions.

It left the question of their claimed experience open for adjudication if the occasion arose, made no order as to costs, and closed the connected miscellaneous petitions.