The candidate, however, maintained that her closing remarks were relevant to the essay she had written in answer to the question, “Write a detailed account on importance and conservation of natural resources.”
Therefore, she moved a petition before the High Court for relief. The Court found merit in her stance, observing,
“Those persons, who are having the idea of ‘patriotism’, definitely safeguard the natural resources for the benefit of the future generations … There is no any dispute that we have to live with the nature. As such, while writing essay, on the issue of importance and conservation of natural resources, at conclusion writing as ‘Jai Hind – Let us live united with nature’ by the petitioner is very relevant.”
The Court, therefore, struck down the TNPSC’s decision to reject her answer paper in a ‘routine’ manner as illegal and unconstitutional.
The TNPSC was ordered to evaluate the candidate’s essay and appoint her to the post if she makes the cut off within four weeks after it receives a copy of the November 6 order.
Source: Barandbench
