Facts
The petitioner, S.T. Sunitha Rai, participated in the selection process for the post of Civil Judge in the Tamil Nadu State Judicial Service under Notification No. 12/2023, scoring 256.360 marks
Source reference: p. 2Initially, she was included in the provisional supplemental selection list
Source reference: p. 2However, the Selection and Appointment Committee later discovered a clerical error: another candidate, Mr. P. Abinesh Karthik, had been wrongly awarded 41 marks instead of 43 in Law Paper I
Source reference: p. 3Upon correction, Mr. Karthik’s total rose to 257.00, placing him above the last appointed candidate in the BC (OBCM) category
Source reference: p. 3This adjustment triggered a re-ranking where Ms. S. Cathrene Jeba Sakunthala (256.50 marks) was edged out of the main list into the reserve list, subsequently displacing the petitioner (256.360 marks) from the supplemental selection
Source reference: p. 4-5Consequently, the TNPSC issued a Memorandum dated 10.07.2025 cancelling the petitioner’s provisional selection
Source reference: p. 1-2The petitioner challenged this cancellation via a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus
Source reference: p. 1Issues
1. Whether the cancellation of the petitioner's provisional supplemental selection, necessitated by the correction of a clerical marking error of a higher-ranked candidate, was legally sustainable.
Source reference: p. 2, 6Law Applied
The Court applied the principles of merit-based selection in public employment and the inherent power of examining bodies to correct bona fide clerical or arithmetical errors in result tabulation
Source reference: p. 2, 6the resolution of the Selection and Appointment Committee of the High Court of Madras dated 15.05.2025, which mandated that the selection list must strictly follow the order of merit, ensuring that candidates with higher marks are preferred over those with lower marks within their respective categories
Source reference: p. 3-4Reasoning
The Court analyzed the records provided by the TNPSC and the High Court’s Selection Committee, which demonstrated that the petitioner’s displacement was a direct mathematical consequence of correcting a totaling error for Mr. P. Abinesh Karthik
Source reference: p. 2-3The Court reasoned that once the error was rectified, Mr. Karthik moved into the zone of selection, causing a "cascading effect" where Ms. Cathrene Jeba Sakunthala (holding higher marks than the petitioner) moved to the first rank of the reserve list
Source reference: p. 4-5Since Ms. Sakunthala's 256.50 marks exceeded the petitioner's 256.360 marks, the petitioner could no longer be maintained in the supplemental selection list for the BC(G) category
Source reference: p. 5The Court found that these administrative corrections were made in accordance with the established selection procedures and rules to ensure transparency and meritocracy
Source reference: p. 6Holding
The Court held that the relief sought by the petitioner deserved no consideration as the revision of the merit list was based on a legitimate correction of a clerical error
The Court answered the issue in the affirmative, stating that the TNPSC’s action, based on the High Court Selection Committee's resolution, was in accordance with selection rules
Source reference: p. 6The Writ Petition was dismissed, with the Court noting that while the petitioner’s provisional selection was cancelled, her name remains in the reserve list
Source reference: p. 6No costs were awarded
Source reference: p. 6Original Court PDF
S.T.SUNITHA RAIvsTHE SECRETARY
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in