M.Venkatesh Sharma v. The Principal District Judge

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 27.01.2016

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI and THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN W.P. No.1021 of 2016 M.Venkatesh Sharma ..

Petitioner Vs.

1.The Principal District Judge, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.

2.The Registrar General, High Court, Madras.

..

Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pass orders on the representation made by the petitioner dated 24.11.2015 seeking appointment for the post of Office Assistant in Tamil Nadu Judicial Department in Dharmapuri District.

For Petitioner .. Mr.T.Dharani

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by SATISH K.AGNIHOTRI, J.) Notice to the respondents is dispensed with, at this stage, as no adverse order is passed against them in this writ petition. Thus, with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

2.By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to consider his representation dated 24 November 2015 for appointment in the post of Office Assistant. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3.According to the petitioner, he is a physically challenged person and he had applied for the post of Office Assistant, pursuant to the advertisement made in news paper. Though he had participated in the interview, he was not selected. Stating that he is entitled to be appointed under the priority category, the petitioner made a representation before the first respondent. It is also contended that the posts are being advertised for appointment.

4. At the threshold, it is to be pointed out that the petitioner has made representation for consideration of his candidature after the vacancies are advertised for appointment. 5.The application made pursuant to the advertisement is required to be processed in accordance with the conditions of the advertisement and also be examined keeping in view the selection process and eligibility required thereto. Thus, it is expected, the aforestated process will be adhered to and as such, no direction to consider the petitioner's representation independently be granted.

6.With the above observation, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mmi To 1.The Principal District Judge, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.

2.The Registrar General, High Court, Madras.

+ 1 ccto Mr.A. Tamil Rajan, Advocate SR.4539 W.P.No.1021 of 2016 SK(CO) Eu 10.02.16 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/