Judgment : 1. The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (TNPSC) issued Advertisement No.258 inviting applications for direct recruitment to the posts included in Combined Subordinate Services Examination -I. The petitioner made application. Her Registration Number is 01913028. The written examination was held on 30.07.2011. Thereafter, the TNPSC published a tentative list of Register Number of candidates admitted provisionally for 5th phase of counselling to Non-Interview posts to be held on 05.02.2014 onwards. But the petitioner's name was not included. Therefore, she filed the present writ petition on 04.02.2014, seeking a direction to call her for certificate verification and to select her. 2. When the writ petition came up for hearing on 04.02.2014, this Court issued an interim direction, directing the respondent to allow the petitioner to participate in the 5th phase of counselling to Non-Interview posts to be held on 05.02.2014. It was further directed that the said order was subject to the result of the writ petition. 3. In pursuance of the said interim order, the petitioner was allowed to participate in the 5th phase of counselling. At that time, the petitioner produced a certificate issued by the Registrar of Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirapalli to show that she had studied in Tamil Medium and obtained Bachelor of Business Administration (B.B.A.) degree from the said University during the years 1997 - 2000. 4. According to the petitioner, as per G.O.Ms.No.145 Personnel and Administrative Reforms (S) Department, dated 30.09.2010, 20% of vacancies are earmarked for the candidates, who had studied in Tamil Medium. The Government Order has been subsequently substantiated by an Act of the Legislature as well. 5. According to the Advertisement, a candidate, who claims reservation with reference to the above should enclose evidence in support of his claim and application submitted without evidence will not be considered for the above said reservation. According to the petitioner, though she had studied the qualifying course in Tamil Medium, she was not considered as against the said reservation, because, she did not produce any certificate to show that she had studied in Tamil Medium. As a result, she was not given the benefit of reservation. 6. According to the petitioner, though she had studied the qualifying course in Tamil Medium, she was not considered as against the said reservation, because, she did not produce any certificate to show that she had studied in Tamil Medium. As a result, she was not given the benefit of reservation. 6. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that though it is true that at the time of submission of the application, the petitioner did not produce the certificate showing that she had studied in Tamil Medium, the fact remains that she had produced the certificate at the time of certificate verification and that itself would be suffice to satisfy the legal requirement. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner would rely on a judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD)No.585 of 2009, dated 11.11.2009 [The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission v. M.Chitra]. In that judgment, question before the Division Bench was as to whether non-production of Community Certificate along with the application would dis-entitle the candidate to claim the benefit of reservation, though the petitioner had produced the said Community Certificate at the time of certificate verification. The contention before the Division Bench by the TNPSC was that non-production of the Community Certificate along with the application would dis-entitle the candidate from claiming the benefit of reservation for the said community. 8. After having considered the above submissions of the learned Standing Counsel for the TNPSC and after having considered various judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in paragraphs 7, 8 and 13, the Division Bench has held as follows :- "7. There can be no controversy that the instructions to candidates and the brochure bind the candidates and the Service Commission, according to which, the candidates are bound to produce all the necessary documents/certificates along with the application. In general, the application shall be rejected for non-production of such certificates/documents. But, in our considered opinion, an exception can be carved out to the same. At this juncture, it would be worthwhile to clarify that all certificates, which are required to be produced along with application, cannot be treated equally. There are some certificates, like certificates relating to the basic qualification etc., which are essential, without which the applications cannot be entertained at all. At this juncture, it would be worthwhile to clarify that all certificates, which are required to be produced along with application, cannot be treated equally. There are some certificates, like certificates relating to the basic qualification etc., which are essential, without which the applications cannot be entertained at all. On the other hand, there are certain other certificates, like Community Certificate, certificates relating to special consideration, like sports certificate, NCC, NSS Certificates, etc., which are not essential for entertaining the application of the candidates. So, there can be no controversy that non-production of the former kind of certificates within the cut off date, shall be a ground to reject the application summarily, as mentioned in the instructions to the candidates and information brochure, because, they relate to the essential qualifications for making application. To put it otherwise, unless the Service Commission is satisfied about the eligibility criteria based on the said certificates, it cannot entertain the applications, and therefore, the applications in such an event are to be necessarily rejected. 8. Insofar as the later kind of certificates are concerned, for entertaining the application, these certificates, which relate only to special qualifications or consideration, are not that much material. Even in the absence of these certificates, the applications are to be entertained and when the question of considering the special qualifications or status arises, it would be suffice, if the certificates are made available to the Commission. For example, if a candidate claims that he/she is entitled for being considered under the quota reserved for Schedule Tribe Community and if the required Community Certificate is not produced, his/her application cannot be rejected, but instead he/she has to be treated under the open quota. For any reason, if such a Community Certificate is produced before the date of finalization of the provisional selection list based on the cut off marks secured in the written examination, in our opinion, the same would be suffice. 13. After referring to the above two judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in paragraphs 15 and 16 of Stella Mary's case, it is held as follows :- "15. Applying the ratio laid down in the above judgments to the facts of the case, one can be sure that it is not appropriate for the respondent to stick on to a technicality which is not only merely procedural but it defeats the very object sought to be achieved. Applying the ratio laid down in the above judgments to the facts of the case, one can be sure that it is not appropriate for the respondent to stick on to a technicality which is not only merely procedural but it defeats the very object sought to be achieved. As held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, what is crucial is as to whether as on the last date for submission of application the petitioner was a destitute widow or not. Yes, it the incontrovertible answer to the said question." 9. Referring to the said judgment and other judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to therein, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in the case on hand also though the petitioner did not produce the Certificate showing that she had studied in Tamil Medium, along with the application, since the certificate is not so basic in nature as it was dealt with by the Division Bench, the production of the certificate at the time of certificate verification would be suffice. 10. But in the counter filed by the respondent/TNPSC, it is contended that non-production of certificate showing that the petitioner had studied in Tamil Medium along with the application would dis-entitle her from claiming the benefit of reservation for Tamil Medium candidates and in terms of the Advertisement, the application shall be rejected summarily, and accordingly, the claim of the petitioner was rejected summarily. 11. The learned Standing Counsel would rely on an order passed by a learned single Judge of this Court in W.P.(MD)No.15253 of 2012 dated 13.12.2013 [L.Devi v. The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (TNPSC)]. In the said case, non-production of certificate showing that the candidate had studied in Tamil Medium came to be considered. In paragraphs 5 and 6 of the said order, the learned single Judge has held as follows :- "5. But unfortunately, the petitioner obtained a certificate from the University only on 19.11.2012, to the effect that she had studied in Tamil medium. Therefore, her application was not considered by the Commission under the category of "PSTM". 6. It is relevant to note that the last date for submission of application forms for selection was 09.02.2011 and the interviews were held from June, 2012 to July, 2012. Therefore, her application was not considered by the Commission under the category of "PSTM". 6. It is relevant to note that the last date for submission of application forms for selection was 09.02.2011 and the interviews were held from June, 2012 to July, 2012. The brochure and the notification issued by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission make it clear that persons, who claim to come under the quota "PSTM", should produce the relevant certificate, at the time of interview, apart from sending a copy of the certificate along with the application forms. The fact that the petitioner secured the certificate from the University only on 19.11.2012 confirms the fact that she did not send a copy of the certificate along with the application form and she did not also produce the copy, at the time of interview. Therefore, the respondent was handicapped in treating the petitioner as a candidate belonging to the Tamil Medium quota. Therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed. No costs." 12. Relying on the said judgment, the learned Standing Counsel would contend that the petitioner cannot be considered as a candidate belonging to the Tamil Medium quota. 13. I have considered the above submissions. 14. For the sake of convenience, let me take up first, the judgment in Devi's case (cited supra). A perusal of the said judgment would go to show that the Division Bench judgment of this Court in M.Chitra's case (cited supra) was not brought to the notice of the learned single Judge. When the Division Bench judgment is precisely on the issue, I am of the view that the judgment of the learned single Judge cannot have any precedence for the same. Apart form that, the judgment of the learned Single Judge in Devi's case is factually distinguishable. In that case, admittedly, certificate showing that the candidate had studied in Tamil Medium was neither produced along with the application nor at the time of certificate verification. It was obtained long after the date of certificate verification and thereafter, it was sought to be produced. It was in those circumstances, the learned single Judge has taken a view that the claim of the candidate that he had studied in Tamil Medium was rightly rejected. It was obtained long after the date of certificate verification and thereafter, it was sought to be produced. It was in those circumstances, the learned single Judge has taken a view that the claim of the candidate that he had studied in Tamil Medium was rightly rejected. But in the case on hand, though the petitioner did not produce the certificate along with the application, admittedly, she had produced the same at time of certificate verification. As has been held by Division Bench, the production of such a certificate at the time of certificate verification would satisfy the requirement. 15. Further, before the Division Bench, the question was whether non-production of Community Certificate along with the application would dis-entitle a candidate from the benefit of reservation for the said community though the candidate had produced the said certificate at the time of certificate verification. While considering the said issue, the Division Bench, in paragraph 7 of the judgment held that there are certain certificates, like Community Certificate, certificates relating to special consideration, like sports certificate, NCC, NSS Certificates, etc., which are not essential for entertaining the application of the candidates. So, there can be no controversy that non-production of the former kind of certificates within the cut off date, shall be a ground to reject the application summarily, as mentioned in the instructions to the candidates and information brochure, they relate to the essential qualifications for making application. The Division Bench further went on to say that unless the Service Commission is satisfied about the eligibility criteria based on the said certificates, it cannot entertain the applications, and therefore, the application in such an event are to be necessarily rejected. 16. The Division Bench further held in paragraph 8 that Insofar as the later kind of certificates are concerned, for entertaining the application, these certificates, which relate only to special qualifications or consideration, are not that much material. Even in the absence of these certificates, the applications are to be entertained and when the question of considering the special qualifications or status arises, it would be suffice, if the certificates are made available to the Commission. 17. Here in the case on hand, it is not as though the application of the petitioner was rejected. Since the production of certificate showing that the petitioner had studied in Tamil Medium was not considered as an essential certificate, the application was accepted. 17. Here in the case on hand, it is not as though the application of the petitioner was rejected. Since the production of certificate showing that the petitioner had studied in Tamil Medium was not considered as an essential certificate, the application was accepted. The said certificate relates only to special status for getting the benefit of reservation in Tamil medium. As has been held by the Division Bench, it would be suffice if the said certificate is produced at the time of certificate verification. In this case, in pursuance of the interim order, the petitioner was called for certificate verification and at that time, the petitioner had produced the certificate and therefore, that satisfied the legal requirement. In such view of the matter, the petitioner is entitled for being considered as a candidate studied in Tamil Medium 18. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of in the following terms :- (i) The petitioner shall be considered as a candidate studied in Tamil medium. (ii) On such consideration, if the petitioner is found falling within the zone of selection, the TNPSC shall select her and issue appropriate order. If it is found that the petitioner does not fall within the zone of selection, even after treating her as "PSTM" candidate, then the Service Commission shall not select her. At any rate, the respondent shall pass appropriate order within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.