IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 04/03/2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ELIPE DHARMA RAO AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN W.A.NOS.1063 AND 1287 OF 2009 AND M.P.NO.1 OF 2009 W.A.NO.1063 / 2009 A.B. Natarajan .. Appellant Vs. 1.The Secretary Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission Government Estate, Chennai. 2.T.Jayaseelan 3.Sudhan R 4.D.Mohan 5.Balasubramaniam K 6.K.V.Muralidharan 7.R.Kalaiselvi 8.J.Vijayarani 9.K.Karpagam 10.J.Anne Mary Swarna 11.S.Vishkan 12.P.Karunakaran 13.P.Kumaravel Pandian 14.K.Ejilearassane 15.D.Baskarapandian 16.D.Ravichandran 17.K.Santhi 18.E.Ravendiran 19.B.Ganesan 20.M.S.Sangeetha 21.T.Christu Raj 22.S.S.Meenakshisundaram 23.R.Brindha Devi 24.M.Aruna https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 25.M.N.Poongudi 26.J.Ranjeethkumar 27.G.Stalin 28.K.Tharpagaraj 29.D.Ashok Kumar 30.R.Pandiarajan 31.C.Shyamala Devi 32.P.Vijayalakshmi 33.M.Kingshlin 34.M.Janaki 35.S.Aravind 36.N.Stephen Jesubatham 37.P.Thangadurai 38.K.Prabakar 39.S.S.Maheswaran 40.M.S.Manivannan 41.V.Shyamala Devi 42.K.Adhiveerapandiyan 43.N.Gandhikumar 44.D.Padmavathy 45.R.Seenivasan 46.M.Thangavel 47.R.K.Sujatha 48.M.Raji 49.P.Renuga Devi 50.R.Sumathi 51.K.Suganthi 52.T.Indira 53.N.Usha 54.M.Jeyaraman 55.K.P.Selvaraj 56.N.Satheesh Kumar 57.B.Subashini 58.M.Sandhanam 59.V.M.Chandisekaran 60.J.Anandhi 61.M.Hema 62.S.Yasodha Devee 63.M.Tamil Selvi 64.L.Balaji Saravanan 65.K.Shanmugam 66.G.Rajendraprasad 67.K.Balakrishnan 68.T.Prabhu 69.K.Pandian 70.P.Subhashini 71.P.Nadukkatturaja 72.T.Selvakumaran 73.M.Dhanalakshmi 74.V.Sivakumar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 75.S.Elanselvi 76.R.V.Kaveri 77.T.Vanitha 78.V.Chamundeeswari 79.S.Malarvili 80.G.Laxmipriya 81.N.Lavanya 82.K.Stalin 83.J.Palaneeswari 84.S.Lakshmi 85.K.P.Vanathi 86.P.Rajalakshmi 87.G.Chitrapavai 88.T.Jeyaraman 89.V.Nallasivam 90.V.Pitchai 91.K.Varadarajan 92.N.Srinivasan ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order dated 10.07.2009 passed in W.P.No.30885 of 2004. Writ petition presented under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of Ceriorarified Mandamus calling for records pertaining to the selection of cendidates for the group-I 2000-2001 services of Tamilnadu Government published by the respondent on 26.8.2004 in Tamilnadu Daily Dina Thanthi and quash the same and direct the 1st respondent to re-draw the selection list in accordance with law and pass such further order. For Appellant : Mr.Vijay Narayan Senior counsel for Mr.N.Subramaniyan For Respondent-1 : Mr.N.R.Chandran Senior counsel for Mr.R.Suresh Kumar For Respondent-50: Mr.N.G.R.Prasad For Respondents 52 & 57 : Mr.V.Subbiah https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ W.A.NO.1287 OF 2009 S.Madhavan .. Appellant Vs. 1.The Secretary Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002. 2.T.Jayaseelan .. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the common order dated 10.07.2009 passed in W.P.No.17969 of 2004 batch of writ petitions. Writ petition presented order Article 226 of the constititon of India for the issuance of a writ of ceriorarified Mandamus calling for records pertaining to the result of Group-I main Exams 2000-01 quash the same and direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's claim for appointment in Group-I Services For Appellant :Mr.B.Kumar Senior counsel for Mr.P.K.Rajesh Praveen Kumar For Respondent-1 :Mr.N.R.Chandran Senior counsel for Mr.R.Suresh Kumar COMMON JUDGMENT D.HARIPARANTHAMAN These writ appeals are directed against the common order dated 10.07.2009 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.17969 of 2004 batch. 2.The facts leading to the filing of these appeals are as follows: (a) The appellant in W.A.No.1063 of 2009 is the petitioner in W.P.No.30885 of 2004. The appellant in W.A.No.1287 of 2009 is the petitioner in W.P.No.17969 of 2004. (b) The appellant in W.A.No.1063 of 2009 filed the writ petition in W.P.No.30885 of 2004 questioning the selection and appointment made in Group– I Services for the year 2000-2001 by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (shortly "the TNPSC") and for a direction to consider him for appointment. In the said writ petition, all the selected candidates were shown as respondents. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ (c) The appellant in W.A.No.1287 of 2009 along with 17 others filed the writ petition in W.P.No.17969 of 2004 questioning the very same selection and appointment made in Group – I Services for the year 2000-2001 and to consider their claim for appointment in Group – I Services. Except the appellant in W.A.No.1287 of 2009, all others withdrew the writ petition. (d) The appellant in W.A.No.1287 of 2009 also filed another writ petition in W.P.No.482 of 2005 praying for a direction to the Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi to investigate the allegations of massive corruption and fraud in the examinations and recruitments conducted by the TNPSC for Group–I Services for the year 2000 – 2001. (e) Challenging the very same selection, 13 unsuccessful candidates filed the writ petition in W.P.No.19851 of 2004. (f) All those writ petitions were disposed of by the learned single Judge, by a common order dated 10.07.2009. (g) While deciding the aforesaid batch of writ petitions on 10.07.2009, the learned single Judge framed the following issues: "20.After considering the elaborate arguments made by the respective counsel, the following points are culled out to be decided in this case: 1)The objection raised by the petitioner S.Madhavan in W.P.No.482 of 2005, especially relating to 8 instances as enumerated above wherein it is stated that at least the said eight candidates were selected due to corrupt practice, while other corresponding 8 persons who have scored more marks have been denied their rights of selection. 2)The introduction of scaling system in respect of optional subjects chosen by the candidates in the main written examinations as to whether the same is arbitrary or resulting in impropriety in the process of selection. 3)The violation of instructions given by the TNPSC in answering the questions in the main written examination papers, as to whether such violations can be treated as making indication to the examiners while valuing for any undue favouritism and consequently, as to whether such selection should be interfered with, especially in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the light of detailed report of second advocate – Commissioner." (h) All the issues were decided against the petitioner in the respective writ petition leading to the filing of the present writ appeals and among the three issues framed by the learned single Judge in the batch of writ petitions, the first issue was not agitated by the appellants in these writ appeals. 3.We have heard the submissions made on either side and perused the materials available on record. 4.The TNPSC issued a notification dated 27.12.2000 inviting applications from candidates for direct recruitment against 95 vacancies (subsequently revised as 91 vacancies) in the following posts included in Group-I Services for the year 2000-2001. Sl. No (1) Name of Service (2) Name of Post (3) No. of vacancies (4) 1 Tamil Nadu Civil Service Deputy Collector 24 2 Tamil Nadu Police Service Deputy Superintendent of Police (Category-I) 20 3 Tamil Nadu Commercial Taxes Services Commercial Tax Officer 10 4 Tamil Nadu Co-operative Service Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies 33 5 Tamil Nadu Panchayat Development Service Divisional Development Officer 5 6 Tamil Nadu General Service District Employment Officer 2 7 Tamil Nadu Fire Service Divisional Fire Officer 1 Total 95 5.Along with the notification, instructions to candidates appearing for competitive (main written) descriptive type examination was issued by the TNPSC. Clause Nos.9, 11, 14, 15, 22 and 23 of the instructions are relevant for the purpose of this case and the same are extracted hereunder: "9.Candidates are required to provide themselves with their own pens, ink, blotting paper and instrument boxes. They are permitted to use only Fountain pen, steel pen and ball point pen using blue or black or blue black inks only. Candidates are advised to leave all personal belongings, books etc., outside the examination hall. Tea, Coffee, Snacks, Soft drinks, etc., will https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ not be served insider or outside the examination hall. Candidates are to maintain strict silence. Candidates should not borrow any material, instruments from other candidates. They shall use only their own pens and permitted material. 11.Candidates should write their answers on both the pages of the answer books supplied to them. The register numbers should be written only on the front page of the first sheet of the main answer book in the space provided for that purpose. They should not write their Register number in the additional answer books, graph sheets, maps or in the journal sheets supplied to them. Two marks from the total marks will be deducted for violation of this instruction. 14.Candidates should not write the register number any where except in the space provided for it. They should not write their names or initials any where. While answering order, judgment or letter writing questions they should use only the names and addresses given in the question or general instructions at the top of the question paper. Two marks will be deducted for violation of this instruction. Candidates should not write any irrelevant or impertinent remarks or any appeal or any marks or irrelevant matter including an appeal to the Examiner for higher marks. The answer book of the candidates who violate this instruction will be invalidated. 15.Candidate should give the correct numbers of the question or sub-division in their answers. If they fail to indicate the correct question number or sub-division of a question or if they give the question number incorrectly, they are liable to lose marks. 22.The application of the candidate who violates any one or more of these instructions or instructions printed on the main answer book or in the memorandum of admission, will be rejected and or his answer books will be invalidated and or he/she will be debarred for such period as the Commission considers fit. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 23.A reduction of two marks will be made for each mistake i.e., for writing the register number incorrectly or for writing the name of the subject and paper incorrectly. A reduction of two marks will be made for the omission to write the register number in the space provided for it." 6.Note (iv) to clause 10 of the notification is also relevant for the purpose of this case and the same is extracted hereunder: "10.(iv) The Scaling Technique for evaluation of answer papers will be adopted in the Main Written Examination." 7.The TNPSC also issued Memorandum of Admission to appear for the written examinations. The said Memorandum contains 8 notes. Note – 5 is relevant for the purpose of this case and the same is extracted hereunder: "5.The candidates should not use colour pens, sketch pens, pencils, except those permitted in the instructions etc., to candidates for any purpose including drawing, underlining and highlighting. They should not write their Register number anywhere (including additional answer books) except in the place provided at the top of the front page of the main answer book." 8.Based on the preliminary examination, 778 faced written examinations. Out of them, 182 were selected for oral test and 91 out of 182 were ultimately selected and appointed. As stated above, writ petitions were filed challenging their selection. 9.The crux of the allegation made in those writ petitions was that the selected candidates used colour pens, sketch pens and pencils etc., and also made certain marks contrary to the instructions issued by the TNPSC to candidates appearing for competitive (main written) descriptive type examination. There was also another allegation that the scaling technique for evaluation of answer scripts was not adopted in the main written examination as provided in the notification. 10.The TNPSC refuted the allegations stating that the scaling technique was adopted, but however, it had applied the scaling technique only in respect of the optional subjects where more than 5 candidates appeared. They acted based on the expert opinion and no prejudice was caused to the writ petitioners. The TNPSC produced all the answer scripts in this regard. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 11.The learned single judge appointed an Advocate Commissioner vide order dated 31.07.2007 in W.P.No.30885 of 2004. The Advocate Commissioner submitted his report dated 16.08.2007. However, both the petitioners therein as well as the TNPSC made objections to the report dated 16.08.2007 of the Advocate Commissioner. 12.In those circumstances, the learned single Judge passed another order dated 23.01.2009 in the very same writ petition viz., W.P.No.30885 of 2004 appointing second Advocate Commissioner. In this regard, paras 1 to 3 of the order dated 23.01.2009 appointing the second Advocate Commissioner are extracted hereunder: "The learned counsel for the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (TNPSC) has produced 14 bundles of answer papers pertaining to 91 candidates who were selected in the competitive examinations held in 2000-01 in respect of Group-I Examinations containing a total number of 637 answer papers. 2.Even though the Advocate Commissioner, who was appointed earlier has filed a report, the report has not contained details about various alleged violations. Therefore, after elaborate arguments, in the circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the entire answer sheets produced by the TNPSC as stated above are to be referred to the Advocate Commissioner to give a factual report. 3.In view of the same, Mr.S.R.Sundar, New No.235, Old No.112, V Floor, Angappa Naicken Street, Chennai 600 001, having Cell No.9444055853 and Landline No.25224477, is appointed as Advocate Commissioner and he shall file a report after verification of 637 answer sheets in respect of 91 candidates each having seven written papers, which are to be produced by the learned counsel for the TNPSC before him. The model forms of the said seven papers as submitted by the petitions counsel are also to be produced before the learned Advocate Commissioner. The learned Advocate Commissioner shall examine answer papers in the presence of respective counsel and file a report in respect of the following: 1)use of sketch pen in the answer papers; 2)use of pencils in the answer papers 3)use of two colours; 4)making of some markings if used in the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ answer sheets like cross, crescent and om; 5)writing of name of candidates, if any, in the answer sheets; and 6)writing question numbers wrongly in the answer sheets and then making alterations in that regard." 13.The second Advocate Commissioner perused 637 answer scripts belonging to the 91 selected candidates and submitted a detailed report dated 20.02.2009 in one volume containing annexure 1 and 2. That apart, he has filed 3 volumes running 440 pages each as annexure 3 and gave a detailed candidates wise report in respect of each paper. The second Advocate Commissioner also filed 4 CDs' along with his report. Based on the aforesaid voluminous report of the second Advocate Commissioner, the appellant in W.A.No.1287 of 2009 has filed the condensed report in the following form: Sl. Name (Res. No) Reg. No. Page s from Adv. Comm . (1) Use of Sket ch (2) Use of Penc il (3) Two Colou r (4) Irrele vant Markin gs (5) Writi ng Name/ Reg. No. (6) Wrong Questi on No. Writte n &Corre cted it Advocate Comm. Remarks 1 M. Raji (R48) 512541 408- 414 YES YES YES NO NO YES Blue and Orange Sketch Pen used 2 S.Malarvizhi (R79) 508273 234- 240 YES YES NO NO NO YES Purple colour sketch used 3 V.Shyamala Devi (R41) 604980 304- 310 YES YES NO NO NO YES Sketch used 4 Sathishkumar (R56) 514721 374- 380 NO YES YES NO NO YES 5 Seenivasan (R45) 514907 555- 561 NO YES YES NO NO YES 6 Jeyasheelan (R2) 505528 101- 107 NO YES YES NO NO YES 7 Suganthi (R51) 596134 150- 156 NO YES YES NO NO YES 8 Ananthi (R60) 574504 164- 170 NO YES YES NO NO YES 9 Nadukatturaja (R71) 509882 195- 205 NO YES YES NO NO YES 10 Kalaiselvi (R7) 506000 220- 226 NO YES YES NO NO YES 11 Arvind (R35) 500894 227- 233 NO YES YES NO NO YES https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sl. Name (Res. No) Reg. No. Page s from Adv. Comm . (1) Use of Sket ch (2) Use of Penc il (3) Two Colou r (4) Irrele vant Markin gs (5) Writi ng Name/ Reg. No. (6) Wrong Questi on No. Writte n &Corre cted it Advocate Comm. Remarks 12 Chamundeeswari (R78) 502369 625- 631 NO YES NO YES NO YES 7th page left blank and written only MANI in the center of the blank page 13 Dhanalakshmi (R73) 562807 653- 659 NO YES NO YES NO YES 14 K.Shanthi (R17) 526199 52- 58 NO YES YES NO NO NO 15 M.Hema (R61) 563769 255- 261 NO YES YES NO NO NO 16 G.Stalin (R27) 572125 583- 589 NO YES YES NO NO NO 17 K.Balakrishnan (R67) 501718 639- 645 NO YES YES NO NO NO 18 Subhashini (R57) 535337 332- 338 NO YES YES NO NO NO 19 K.V.Muralidharan (R6) 509392 367- 373 NO YES YES NO NO NO Map supplied by TNPSC is missing in Geograph y I 20 N.Lavanya (R81) 585356 381- 387 NO YES YES NO NO NO 21 R.Sumathi (R50) 517558 422- 428 NO YES YES NO NO NO 22 R.Ranjithkumar (R26) 533793 73- 79 NO YES NO NO NO YES 23 Thangadurai (R37) 518279 87- 93 NO YES NO NO NO YES 24 K.Pandian (R69) 510708 122- 128 NO YES NO NO NO YES 25 K.Karpagam (R9) 522973 129- 135 NO YES NO NO NO YES https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sl. Name (Res. No) Reg. No. Page s from Adv. Comm . (1) Use of Sket ch (2) Use of Penc il (3) Two Colou r (4) Irrele vant Markin gs (5) Writi ng Name/ Reg. No. (6) Wrong Questi on No. Writte n &Corre cted it Advocate Comm. Remarks 26 C.Chitrapavai (R87) 502689 157- 163 NO YES NO NO NO YES 27 T.Vanitha (R77) 502689 192- 198 NO YES NO NO NO YES 28 K.P.Vanathi (R85) 528377 206- 212 NO YES NO NO NO YES 29 M.S.Sangeetha (R20) 513978 248- 254 NO YES NO NO NO YES 30 R.Brindha Devi (R23) 529859 262- 268 NO YES NO NO NO YES 31 V.Sivakumar (R74) 516441 269- 275 NO YES NO NO NO YES 32 V.Pitchai (R90) 550343 283- 289 NO YES NO NO NO YES 33 AnnaMarySwarna (R10) 542329 311- 317 NO YES NO NO NO YES 34 J.Palaneeswari (R83) 510580 360- 366 NO YES NO NO NO YES 35 R.V.Kaveri (R76) 546640 429- 435 NO YES NO NO NO YES 36 S.Elanselvi (R75) 575746 444- 449 NO YES NO NO NO YES 37 P.Subhashini (R70) 540875 471- 477 NO YES NO NO NO YES 38 K.Shanmugam (R65) 515870 478- 484 NO YES NO NO NO YES 39 M.Tamil Selvi (R63) 518134 485- 491 NO YES NO NO NO YES 40 N.Gandhikumar (R43) 503760 499- 505 NO YES NO NO NO YES 41 M.S.Manivannan (R40) 508537 506- 512 NO YES NO NO NO YES 42 R.K.Sujatha (R47) 517477 520- 526 NO YES NO NO NO YES 43 M.Santhanam (R58) 513939 534- 540 NO YES NO NO NO YES 44 T.Selvakumar (R72) 553436 569- 571 NO YES NO NO NO YES 45 V.Nallasivam (R89) 510029 597- 603 NO YES NO NO NO YES https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sl. Name (Res. No) Reg. No. Page s from Adv. Comm . (1) Use of Sket ch (2) Use of Penc il (3) Two Colou r (4) Irrele vant Markin gs (5) Writi ng Name/ Reg. No. (6) Wrong Questi on No. Writte n &Corre cted it Advocate Comm. Remarks 46 S.Meenakshisunda ram (R22) 508924 632- 638 NO YES NO NO NO YES 47 P.Rajalakshmi (R86) 533379 660- 666 NO YES NO NO NO YES 48 Chandrasekar (R59) 521364 674- 680 NO YES NO NO NO YES 49 M.Aruna (R24) 501232 681- 687 NO YES NO NO NO YES 50 S.Lakshmi (R84) 507688 66- 72 NO YES NO NO NO NO 51 Yashoda Devi (R62) 574245 178- 184 NO YES NO NO NO NO 52 Kumaravel Pandian (R13) 547037 185- 191 NO YES NO NO NO NO 53 N.Usha (R53) 528306 318- 324 NO YES NO NO NO NO 54 P.Renukadevi (R49) 525916 325- 331 NO YES NO NO NO NO First page of main answer book left blank 55 N.StephenJesupat ham (R36) 595941 339- 345 NO YES NO NO NO NO 56 K.Stalin (R82) 517019 346- 352 NO YES NO NO NO NO 57 K.Balasubramania n (R5) 501827 394- 400 NO YES NO NO NO NO 58 G.Rajendraprasad (R66) 512425 401- 407 NO YES NO NO NO NO 59 P.Vijayalakshmi (R32) 520054 450- 456 NO YES NO NO NO NO 60 M.N.Poongodi (R75) 524965 548- 554 NO YES NO NO NO NO 61 D.Ravichandran (R16) 513416 562- 568 NO YES NO NO NO NO 62 R.Sudhan (R3) 517342 576- 582 NO YES NO NO NO NO 63 T.Jayaraman (R88) 505724 590- 596 NO YES NO NO NO NO https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sl. Name (Res. No) Reg. No. Page s from Adv. Comm . (1) Use of Sket ch (2) Use of Penc il (3) Two Colou r (4) Irrele vant Markin gs (5) Writi ng Name/ Reg. No. (6) Wrong Questi on No. Writte n &Corre cted it Advocate Comm. Remarks 64 M.Janaki (R34) 505125 618- 624 NO YES NO NO NO NO 65 P.Karunakaran (R12) 564900 646- 652 NO YES NO NO NO NO 66 T.Ashok Kumar (R29) 501318 667- 673 NO YES NO NO NO NO 67 J.Vijayarani (R8) 519920 297- 303 NO NO YES YES NO YES + (- 3- This religiou s symbols presente d in the first page of the main answer book in 4 out of 7 papers 68 D.Mohan (R4) 509082 108- 114 NO NO YES NO NO YES 69 G.Lakshmipriya (R80) 592685 115- 121 NO NO YES NO NO YES 70 Ejilearassane (R14) 530254 492- 498 NO NO YES NO NO NO 71 Balaji Saravanan (R64) 501692 213- 219 NO NO NO YES NO NO 72 T.Indira (R52) 537915 415- 421 NO NO NO YES NO NO 73 N.Seenivasan (R92) 540819 80- 86 NO NO NO NO NO YES 74 K.Tharagaraj (R88) 518379 94- 100 NO NO NO NO NO YES 75 T.Christraj (R21) 502707 143- 149 NO NO NO NO NO YES 76 S.S.Maheswaran (R39) 547537 171- 177 NO NO NO NO NO YES 77 T.Prabhu (R68) 511368 276- 282 NO NO NO NO NO YES https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sl. Name (Res. No) Reg. No. Page s from Adv. Comm . (1) Use of Sket ch (2) Use of Penc il (3) Two Colou r (4) Irrele vant Markin gs (5) Writi ng Name/ Reg. No. (6) Wrong Questi on No. Writte n &Corre cted it Advocate Comm. Remarks 78 K.P.Selvaraj (R55) 515169 290- 296 NO NO NO NO YES YES This candidat e wrote his reg. no.51516 9 in map of Geograph y I 79 D.Baskara Pandian (R15) 537145 436- 442 NO NO NO NO NO YES 80 B.Ganesan (R19) 544272 457- 463 NO NO NO NO NO YES 81 K.Athiveerapandi an (R42) 500072 541- 547 NO NO NO NO NO YES 82 M.Thangavel (R46) 555783 604- 610 NO NO NO NO NO YES 83 E.Raveendran (R18) 513258 611- 617 NO NO NO NO NO YES 84 S.Visakan (R11) 520273 388- 393A NO NO NO NO NO NO Perfect candidat e in all 7 papers 85 C.Shyamala Devi (R31 554258 353- 359 NO NO NO NO NO NO Perfect candidat e in all 7 papers 86 R.Pandiarajan (R30) 550012 513- 519 NO NO NO NO NO NO Perfect candidat e in all 7 papers 87 K.Kingslin (R33) 507085 59- 65 NO NO NO NO NO NO Perfect candidat e in all 7 papers 88 K.Prabhakar (R38) 511248 464- 470 NO NO NO NO NO NO Perfect candidat e in all 7 papers 89 D.Padmavathi (R44) 510549 136- 142 NO NO NO NO NO NO Perfect candidat e in all 7 papers https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sl. Name (Res. No) Reg. No. Page s from Adv. Comm . (1) Use of Sket ch (2) Use of Penc il (3) Two Colou r (4) Irrele vant Markin gs (5) Writi ng Name/ Reg. No. (6) Wrong Questi on No. Writte n &Corre cted it Advocate Comm. Remarks 90 M.Jayaraman (R54) 545588 241- 247 NO NO NO NO NO NO Perfect candidat e in all 7 papers 91 K.Varadharajan (R91) 536138 527- 533 NO NO NO NO NO NO Perfect candidat e in all 7 papers TOTAL 3 66 21 5 1 55 8 In nutshell, 83 out of 91 candidates committed the following types of violations, which is not disputed by the TNPSC. "1.Sketch pen used candidates - 3 2.Pencil used candidates - 66 3.Two colours used candidates - 21 4.Irrelevant marking used candidates - 5 5.Writing Name / Register No. - 1 6.Wrong question no. written candidates - 55 7.Perfect candidates - 8 9.First page of main answer book left blank -21 " 14.The learned single Judge held that non-adoption of scaling technique for evaluation of subjects where less than five candidates appeared would