S.Thaj v. The District Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED :12.04.2019

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No.10858 of 2019 and W.M.P.No.11301 of 2019 S.Thaj ..Petitioner vs 1.The District Collector, Villupuram District, Villupuram.

2.The Tahsildar, Marakkanam Taluk, Marakkanam, Villupuram District.

.. Respondents Prayer:

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent herein to issue an order appointing the Petitioner for the post of the Village Assistant for Chettikuppam Village, Marakkanam Taluk in Villupuram District based on the interview held on 15.02.2019.

For Petitioner : Mr.Duraiswamy P.M.

For Respondent : Mr.A.N.Thambidurai Special Government Pleader for R1 & R2

O R D E R

The relief sought for in the present writ petition is for a direction to direct the 2nd respondent herein to issue an order appointing the Petitioner for the post of the Village Assistant for Chettikuppam Village, Marakkanam Taluk in Villupuram District based on the interview held on 15.02.2019. 2.The grievances of the writ petitioner is that her name was sponsored through the District Employment Exchange for appointment to the Post of the Village Assistant for Chettikuppam Village, Marakkanam Taluk in Villupuram District. The writ petitioner also participated in the interview on 15.02.2019 in the office of the 2nd respondent.

3.The learned counsel for the writ petitioner states that the petitioner is fully qualified and possessing all requisite criteria for the purpose of appointment to the Post of Village Assistant. Inspite of that, the respondents are not issuing the appointment order and even the status of the interview has not been communicated to the writ petitioner.

4.This Court is of the considered opinion that mere participation in the process of selection or attending interview, would not confer any right on the candidate to seek a direction to issue the appointment order. If at all, any other person is appointed in violation of the Recruitment Notification or the Service Rules in force, then alone, the writ petitioner will get cause of action for the purpose of challenging such illegal orders. Contrarily, the writ petitioner cannot seek direction based on her participation in the process of interview conducted by the respondents. There is every possibility of even cancelling the selection or the selections may not be proceeded with on account of the fact that the adequate number of applications has not been received or persons had not participated. There may be other administrative reasons also.

However, a candidate, who participated in the process of selection, cannot claim appointment as a matter of right. 5.This being the legal principles to be followed, it is left open to the writ petitioner to approach the competent authorities for the purpose of getting informations in respect of the interview already conducted. However, the relief as such sought for in the present writ petition cannot be granted. 6.Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar kak To 1.The District Collector, Villupuram District, Villupuram.

2.The Tahsildar, Marakkanam Taluk, Marakkanam, Villupuram District.

+1cc to Mr.P.M.Duraisamy, Advocate, S.R.No.36039 W.P.No.10858 of 2019 VSN II(CO) RRS(09/05/2019)