Facts
The petitioner applied for the post of Assistant Professor under TRB Notification No. 04/2025 and claimed experience as an Assistant Professor at Daulat Ram College, University of Delhi, from 1 January 2018 to 3 August 2022.
Source reference: pp. 2–3, paras. 1–3The notification required an experience certificate in the prescribed Annexure-IV format; for experience gained outside Tamil Nadu, the certificate had to be countersigned by the relevant university.
Source reference: p. 3, para. 2Unable to obtain a certificate in that format, the petitioner asked TRB to accept the certificate issued by the College and award experience marks. After TRB did not act on her representation, she sought a writ of mandamus.
Source reference: pp. 4–5, paras. 5–6Issues
1. Whether TRB could be directed to accept the College’s experience certificate, despite its not being in the prescribed format and lacking the required university countersignature.
Source reference: pp. 3–5, paras. 2, 6–92. Whether the petitioner’s unsuccessful efforts to obtain a certificate in the prescribed format justified directing TRB to consider her representation or depart from the prescribed procedure.
Source reference: pp. 5–6, paras. 9–11Law Applied
Article 226 of the Constitution empowers the High Court to issue a writ of mandamus, but the Court will not direct a public authority to disregard a prescribed recruitment procedure absent a legal basis to do so.
Source reference: pp. 3–5, paras. 2, 6–8Under the notification’s Annexure-IV requirements, an experience certificate for service outside Tamil Nadu had to be issued in the prescribed format and countersigned by the relevant university after verification.
Source reference: pp. 3–5, paras. 2, 6–8The Court found no arbitrariness in that requirement and considered university verification a means of ensuring the certificate’s genuineness.
Source reference: p. 4, para. 7; p. 5, para. 8Reasoning
The petitioner’s College-issued certificate did not satisfy the notification’s prescribed requirements, which included university verification for experience gained outside Tamil Nadu.
Source reference: pp. 5–6, paras. 9–11The Court accepted that she had made sincere efforts to obtain a compliant certificate but held that those efforts did not entitle her to require TRB to deviate from the prescribed procedure.
Source reference: pp. 5–6, paras. 9–11As the requested representation sought acceptance of a certificate that did not meet those requirements, the Court declined to order TRB to consider it.
Source reference: p. 6, para. 11Holding
The Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that it would not direct TRB to accept the non-compliant certificate or consider the petitioner’s representation on that basis.
It left open the petitioner’s option to submit an experience certificate in the prescribed format. No costs were ordered.
Source reference: p. 6, para. 12Original Court PDF
BINUSHA JOYCELLvsTHE CHARIPERSON
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
