K.Raja v. The District Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 01.04.2022

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR W.P.No.7742 of 2022 K.Raja ... Petitioner vs.

1. The District Collector, Thiruvallur District.

2. The Tahsildar, Thiruvallur District.

... Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to dispose of the representation dated 20.01.2022 made to him in accordance with law.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Sivanesan For Respondents: Mrs.S.Anitha Special Government Pleader

O R D E R

By consent of both parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. This writ petition has been filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to dispose the representation dated 20.01.2022 made by the petitioner.

3. The case of the petitioner in brief:

The petitioner was called for an interview for the post of "Thalayari" i.e., Village Assistant sponsored by the District Employment Exchange and he attended the interview and was selected to the said post. Thereafter, certificate verification was conducted by the then Tahsildar and the petitioner was informed that the appointment order would be issued soon. But, the petitioner was not issued with any appointment order.

Therefore, he made several representations on different occasions but the said representations are still pending, no order has been passed. Hence, he filed this instant writ petition before this Court.

4. The learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondent would submit that, the petitioner has approached this Court after lapse of ten years and he would not have any legal rights to seek appointment based on his representation and hence the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. According to the petitioner, the interview for the post of Village Assistant (Thalaiyari) was held on 14.12.2010. The representation under Right to Information Act, seeking to furnish the details with regard to selection process, was forwarded to the second respondent and the petitioner was also informed vide letter dated 12.04.2013 by the second respondent that, there is no appointment made, on account of the fact that there was a case, pending before the High Court of Madras, Now, after a lapse of nearly 12 years from the date of interview, the petitioner approached the court seeking direction to the respondent to dispose his representation, praying appointment to the post of Village Assistant, on the ground that he attended the interview on 14.02.2010, however appointment order was not issued.

Such writ petition cannot be entertained. Merely attending the interview would not confer any legal right to the petitioner, to appoint him in the post of Village Assistant. Further, already, the petitioner was informed vide reply dated 12.04.2013 by the second respondent that, no appointment was made, inview of the case pending before this court. Apart from that, the petitioner has not placed any materials before this Court with regard to the issuance of appointment order to the candidates, who attended the interview on 14.12.2010. Hence, there is no merits in this writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS IV) True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar ata/mst

To

1. The District Collector, Thiruvallur District.

2. The Tahsildar, Thiruvallur District.

+1cc to Mr.M.Baskaran, Advocate, S.R.No.22055 W.P.No.7742 of 2022 MT[co] NSK 21/04/2022