A.Naseema, v. The District Collector,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.01.2017
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN W.P.No.1697/2017 & WMP.No.1666/2017 A.Naseema ..
Petitioner Vs
1. The District Collector Thiruvannamalai, Thiruvannamalai District.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer Chetpet Taluk, Chetpet, Tiruvannamalai District.
3. The Tahsildar Chetpet Taluk, Thiruvannamalai District. ..
Respondents Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 09.01.2017 and appoint the petitioner to the post of the Village Assistant in the vacancies declared in Chetpet Taluk , Tiruvannamalai District based on the interview held on 04.01.2017.
For Petitioner :
Mr.G.Rajan For RR 1 to 3 :
Mr.P.Sanjay Gandhi, Additional Govt.Pleader
ORDER
By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. Mr.P.Sanjay Gandhi, learned Additional Government Pleader accepts notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3. The petitioner claims that she is a Muslim destitute widow and eking out her livelihood by doing odd jobs and she is finding it extremely difficult to make both ends meet. The petitioner would further state that she has completed SSLC in the year 1999 and got married to one Nazeerullah and he died during the year 2010 and she is also a destitute widow and as such, her claim for appointment is to be considered under the Destitute Widow category.
The petitioner got her name
registered with the District Employment Exchange, Tiruvannamalai in the year 2011 and she has also applied for the post of Village Assistant and she was issued with the Call Letter dated 26.12.2016 by the 3rd respondent and accordingly, the petitioner has attended the interview along with the testimonials / certificates. However, she is yet to be informed of the selection process. The petitioner in this regard, has also submitted a representation dated 09.01.2017 to the 1st respondent and though it was received and acknowledged on the same day, she is yet to be favoured with any kind of response and hence, she came forward to file the present writ petition. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is now aged 34 years and she is attaining the age of 35 years on 12.04.
2017 and in that event, age bar will come into operation and she cannot claim any future employment and therefore, prays for appropriate orders. Heard submissions of Mr.P.Sanjay Gandhi, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. Though the petitioner has prayed for a larger relief, this Court, in the light of the above facts and circumstances and without going into the merits of the claims projected by the petitioner, directs the 1st respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 09.01.2017 on merits and in accordance with law and pass orders within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the decision taken, to the petitioner.
The writ petition stands disposed of with the above direction. No costs.
s/d- Assistant Registrar(CS-II) //True Copy// Sub-Assistant Registrar AP
To
1. The District Collector Thiruvannamalai, Thiruvannamalai District.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer Chetpet Taluk, Chetpet, Tiruvannamalai District.
3. The Tahsildar Chetpet Taluk, Thiruvannamalai District.
+1 CC to M/s. G. Rajan, Advocate sr 4519 +1 CC to Govt. Pleader, High Court, Madras sr 4904 W.P.No.1697/2017 RSK(CO) sp/31/1