JUDGMENT (Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the entire records pertaining to the order passed by the Under Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission/ the third respondent herein vide his proceeding No.Memo No.4977/OTD-B2/2010 dated 19.06.2013 and quash the same as highly illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable being violative of rules and principles of natural justice and thereby direct the respondents herein to select and appoint the petitioner in any of the posts included in Group-II services for which a combined Subordinate Services examination – I 2009-2011 as per the time fixed by this Court.) 1. Seeking to quash the proceeding No.Memo No.4977/OTD-B2/2010 dated 19.06.2013 on the file of the third respondent and for a consequential direction to the respondents herein to select and appoint the petitioner in any of the posts included in Group-II services for which a combined Subordinate Services examination – I 2009-2011, the petitioner has filed the present petition. 2. The main contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, eventhough the petitioner''s rank came within the last day of first phase of counselling itself, he was not called for counselling till date. Though about 6900 vacancies were notified, the respondents had conducted counseling which is extended upto VI phase alleging that, either the candidates have not turned up or cancellation of provisional selection for various reasons, etc. 3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, on verification with the respondents'' office, it was stated that, the petitioner has not enclosed a separate sheet/certificate for having undergone the studies in Tamil Medium, which is not stipulated either in the instructions to candidates or in the information brochure to candidates. 4. Thereafter, the petitioner has approached the Institute of Distance Education, University of Madras. Its Director has categorically certified that, the petitioner had undergone the Degree Course in Tamil medium vide his certificate dated 07.12.2012. When the same was produced before the 3rd respondent herein, the same was not considered. Aggrieved against the same, the petitioner submitted a representation, in person, to the 2nd respondent herein on 12.10.2012 but the same was not considered till date. However, the petitioner also made representations to the Hon''ble Chief Minister Cell on 03.04.2013 and 10.04.2013. When the same was produced before the 3rd respondent herein, the same was not considered. Aggrieved against the same, the petitioner submitted a representation, in person, to the 2nd respondent herein on 12.10.2012 but the same was not considered till date. However, the petitioner also made representations to the Hon''ble Chief Minister Cell on 03.04.2013 and 10.04.2013. In reply to the said representations, the third respondent vide proceedings dated 19.06.2013 has stated that as per para 3 A (iii) and para 10 of the Notification No.258, dated 30.12.2010, a certificate to that effect has to be enclosed. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that in the absence of any publication of the entire contents of the recruitment notification in the news dailies, the respondents cannot insist for enclosing any certificate along with the application form and cannot also deny an otherwise eligible appointment on that score. Even in the said notification, a Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.145 P& AR (S) Department dated 30.09.1020 is referred to fill up 20% of all vacancies in direct recruitment on preferential basis to Persons studied in Tamil medium and further, the notification reads that, clarification in this regard is awaited from the Government and therefore, stated that the notification itself is not comprehensive and a poor candidate cannot be expected to understand and comprehend the terms of the notification in the right manner. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that, for the non-interview posts, independent of whether a candidate studied in Tamil Medium or not, candidates were called for counseling based on the ranks obtained by them in the written examination from 26.11.2012 to 01.12.2012. As stated above, the petitioner''s rank in the written examination is 6378 for which, according to the petitioner, he should have been called for counseling on 01.12.2012 AN in the counseling held for the ranks between 5731 to 120988 but the candidates who had secured lower ranks and belonging to the same community and also younger to the petitioner by age were called for the counseling. Therefore, the contention of the respondents that the petitioner has not reached the zone of consideration for counseling is false and therefore, the petitioner prayed for quashing the proceeding No.Memo No.4977/OTD-B2/2010 dated 19.06.2013 on the file of the third respondent, thereby allowing the present revision. 7. Therefore, the contention of the respondents that the petitioner has not reached the zone of consideration for counseling is false and therefore, the petitioner prayed for quashing the proceeding No.Memo No.4977/OTD-B2/2010 dated 19.06.2013 on the file of the third respondent, thereby allowing the present revision. 7. Meanwhile, the petitioner has filed a rejoinder, specifically raising the ground that the petitioner is eligible under the SC General category for selection and that the petitioner is senior to the other selected candidates, whose names have been mentioned in the rejoinder. This Court, had directed the petitioner to implead those candidates, as parties, vide order dated 04.02.2018. 8. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also perused the counter filed by the respondents. 9. Perusal of court records reveal that, this Court vide order dated 04.02.2018 has directed the petitioner to implead the selected candidates as parties. But till date, the learned counsel for the petitioner has not taken any steps to implead those candidates as party respondents. The petitioner in the present writ petition sought for writ of certiorari. While the petitioner sought to quash the order passed by the respondents, the parties in whose favour the said order is issued are also necessary parties. It would be against the principles of natural justice to make an order adverse to them behind their back and any order so made could not be an effective one. They were, therefore, necessary parties before the High Court. The record discloses that the petitioner did not file any application before this Court for impleading them as respondents. In such circumstances, it is not necessary to express any opinion on the merits of the matter raised by the petitioner. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed for non joinder of necessary parties. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.