Mrs. Janagi v. The District Collector,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF MADRAS

DATED: 20.09.2016

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH W.P.No.36288 of 2015 & M.P.No.1 of 2015 Janagi ... Petitioner -vs1.The District Collector, Krishnagiri.

2.The Commissioner, Bargur Panchayat Union, Krishnagiri District.

... Respondents Writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order in N.K.No.298/2007/A9 dated 15.10.2007 on the file of the second respondent and quash the same; consequentially direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service, with continuity of seniority, within a reasonable time to be fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner :

Mr.P.Rajavel For Respondent No.1 :

Mr.S.Gunasekaran Additional Government Pleader For Respondent No.2 :

Mr.R.Rajendra Narasimman

O R D E R

The petitioner has come up with the present writ petition for a Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order in N.K.No.298/2007/A9 dated 15.10.2007 on the file of the second respondent and quash the same and consequentially direct the respondents to reinstate him into service, with continuity of seniority, within a reasonable time to be fixed by this Court.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2.It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as Cook-Assistant at the Noon-Meal Centre in Panchayat Union Elementary School at Chendrayanayanoor in Burgur Union, which is under the control of the second respondent. However, on 15.10.2007, the second respondent cancelled the appointment of the petitioner stating that the qualification for the post of Cook Assistant must have completed the age of 25 years. According to the petitioner, he made several representations to the respondents and finally, on 03.09.2015 to the respondents to reinstate him into service. Since the same was not considered so far, left with no other alternative, the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition.

3.The petitioner has chosen to file the present writ petition, with an inordinate delay i.e. belatedly after 8 years. Therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of latches and the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Asst. Registrar.

/true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar.

sri To 1.The District Collector, Krishnagiri.

2.The Commissioner, Bargur Panchayat Union, Krishnagiri District.

+1 CC to Mr. P. Rajavel, Advocate Sr.No.53537 +1 CC to Govt., Pleader, Sr.No.53449 W.P.No.36288 of 2015 NM (CO) MD : 06/10/2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/