D.Raja, v. The District Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 11.03.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA D.Raja ...

Petitioner versus 1.The District Collector, District Collectorate Office, Villupuram.

2.The District Employment Officer, District Employment Office, Villupuram.

3.The Tahsildar, Cuddalore.

...

Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 11.01.2021 for appointment of the petitioner in anyone of the suitable posts based on the certificate dated 06.08.2010 issued by the Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition/T.N.H.B, Gundusalai, Cuddalore - 607 001 for priority in employment. . For Petitioner :

Mr.R.Bharath Kumar For Respondents :

Mr.K.H.Ravikumar Government Advocate 1/6

O R D E R

Heard Mr.R.Bharath Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.K.H.Ravikumar, learned Government Advocate for the respondents and perused the materials available on record.

2.

Mr.R.Bharath Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner's lands measuring to an extent of 5.5 cents comprised in Survey No.53.2C1A, Saalamedu Village, Villupuram Town, have been acquired by the petitioner's mother, by name Vijaya. Since the petitioner's family did not have any other lands other than the lands which have been acquired, a Certificate was issued by the Special Tahsildar for giving priority in employment in terms of Government Order in G.O.(Ms).No.188, Labour and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 28.12.1976. Now, the grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner has not been considered for any appointment thereafter and his representations have also not been considered by the respondents. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition.

2/6

3.

Mr.K.H.Ravikumar, learned Government Advocate for the respondents submitted that there is no vacancy as of now in order to accommodate the petitioner in the appointment. 4.

However Mr.R.Bharath Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been called for an interview at some point of time and thereafter, the interview itself got cancelled. 5.

Having given an assurance for priority, while considering the Government appointments, the petitioner could have been accommodated suiting to his qualification. The 2nd respondent / District Employment Officer is only the sponsoring authority and he has also informed the petitioner that if the petitioner so intends he can join the free coaching classes given by the 2nd respondent Office for writing the examinations meant for TNPSC, RRB, UGSC, SSC recruitments. But those employments can only be done in accordance with the Employment Rules pertaining to such recruitments. But the petitioner has been given with the priority certificate in accordance with G.O.(Ms).No.188, Labour and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 28.12.1976.

3/6

6.

Hence, the 1st respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's request in the light of the Government Order issued in G.O.(Ms).No.188, Labour and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 28.12.1976 in any of the available vacancies or in any such vacancies that might arise in a near future and pass appropriate orders on its own merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If needed, the petitioner's request for relaxing the age can also be considered.

With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed. No costs. 11.03.2024 Speaking order / Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No : Yes / No sri 4/6

To 1.The District Collector, District Collectorate Office, Villupuram.

2.The District Employment Officer, District Employment Office, Villupuram.

3.The Tahsildar, Cuddalore.

5/6

R.N.MANJULA , J.

sri 11.03.2024 6/6