R.Gomathi, v. The District Collector,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 08.12.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.No.31831 of 2017 R.Gomathi ..

Petitioner -vs1. The District Collector Nagapattinam

2. The Block Development Officer Vedaranyam

3. The Village Administrative Officer Panchanathikulam Nadu Sethi Village

4. A.Vijaya ..

Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the first respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.487/Sa.Vu.Thi/2016 dated 22.05.2017, quash the same and consequently direct the first and second respondents to appoint the petitioner as Noon Meal Organizer in Shanmuga Aided Middle School, Panchanathikulam, Nadu Sethi, Vedaranyam Taluk, Nagapattinam District.

For Petitioner :: Mr.R.Murugabharathi For Respondents:: Mr.R.A.S.Senthilvel Additional Government Pleader for R1 & 3 Mr.J.H.Inian for R2

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 22.5.2017, in and by which the District Collector, Nagapattinam, the first respondent herein had chosen to appoint Mrs.A.Vijaya, the fourth respondent herein as the Noon Meal Organizer in Shanmuga Aided Middle School, Panchanathikulam, Nadu Sethi, Vedaranyam Taluk.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that when the notification was issued by the second respondent on 12.1.2017 calling applications from the eligible candidates for the post of Noon Meal Organizer in the noon meal centre at Shanmuga Aided Middle School, Panchanathikulam, Vedaranyam Taluk, the petitioner, possessing all the requisite and prescribed qualifications, applied for the same. Subsequently, she was directed to appear for an interview and certificate verification held on 24.2.2017 by the Block Development Officer. As per the interview call letter issued by the second respondent, the petitioner attended the interview and produced all the relevant certificates, namely, residence certificate, income certificate, educational certificates, etc.

When the petitioner was hopeful of getting an appointment order, as she is residing within one kilometre distance from the noon meal centre, the first respondent appointed the fourth respondent who is staying three kilometres away. Adding further, he submitted that the petitioner was also informed that the fourth respondent is not having the genuine certificates.

3. I do not know how the petitioner's counsel can make a statement that the petitioner was informed to say that the fourth respondent produced fake certificate(s). When the petitioner is not even able to make out a definite case that the fourth respondent is not an eligible candidate, this Court cannot interfere with the impugned order passed by the first respondent appointing the fourth respondent as a Noon Meal Organizer. Accordingly, the writ petition fails and it is dismissed. Consequently, W.M.P.No.34975 & 34976 of 2017 are also dismissed. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar ss To

1. The District Collector Nagapattinam

2. The Block Development Officer Vedaranyam

3. The Village Administrative Officer Panchanathikulam Nadu Sethi Village +1cc to Government Pleader SR.No.88169 W.P.No.31831 of 2017 sm:28.12.2017