G.Manikandan v. The Managing Director

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 27-08-2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No.30986 of 2015 And W.M.P.No.22988 of 2016 G.Manikandan ..

Petitioner Vs.

1.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Villupuram Division.

2.The General Manager, Tamil nadu State Transport Corporation, Villupuram Division.

..

Respondents PRAYER:

Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to provide employment to the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Raghavachari For Respondents : Mr.A.Antony Arockia Raja

O R D E R

The relief sought for in this writ petition is for a direction to direct the respondents to provide employment to the writ petitioner.

2. The learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner, states that pursuant to the advertisement, inviting applications for recruitment to the post of Drivers, Conductors and Junior Technicians in Villupuram, Tiruvannamalai, Thiruvallur, Kanchipuram and Chennai Districts, the writ petitioner submitted an application. The writ petitioner is fully qualified for appointment to the post as per the notification.

3. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner further states that the writ petitioner was called for to attend the interview and a letter dated 19.11.2014 was sent to the writ petitioner. The writ petitioner participated in the interview. However, the writ petitioner had not been selected and appointed.

4. It is brought to the notice of the Court that the writ petitioner was once again called for to attend an interview and the writ petitioner is going to attend the interview. The interview is scheduled to be held on 29.8.2018.

5. This Court is of an opinion that if at all the writ petitioner has received any such call letter from the respondents, it is left open to him to participate in the interview, if he is otherwise eligible in accordance with the Rules, he can be considered for appointment. However, in respect of the present writ petition, the relief, as such, sought for by the writ petitioner, cannot be granted in view of the fact that appointment can never be claimed as a matter of right. Mere submission of application, pursuant to the notification, will not confer any right for a candidate to file a writ petition, seeking an order of appointment.

6. All public appointments are to be made only in accordance with the Recruitment Rules in force. Equal opportunity in public employment is a constitutional mandate. The authorities competent are bound to follow the Recruitment Rules scrupulously and without any violation. All eligible persons must be given an opportunity of participating in the selection. If at all the writ petitioner is also eligible, his case also can be considered on par with all other eligible candidates in accordance with the Rules.

7. This being the principles to be followed, the relief, as such, sought for by the writ petitioner, cannot be granted and accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.

Sd/-- Assistant Registrar(CS VII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

Svn +1cc to Mr.V.Raghavachari, Advocate SR.NO.58303 +1cc to Mr.A.Antony Arokiaraja, Advocate SR.NO.58616 sm:6.9.2018 WP 30986 of 2015