K.Manogran v. The Assistant Director

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 11.10.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN W.P.No.33875 of 2014 E.Manogaran ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Assistant Director, District Employment Office, Nagapattinam District, Nagapattinam.

2.The Commissioner, Mayiladudhurai Municipality, Nagapattinam District.

... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to relax him the maximum age limit i.e,, 32 years for the vacant Post of Bill Clerk and Junior Assistant in the 2nd respondent's office.

For Petitioner : No Appearance For Respondents : Mr.G.Nanmaran Special Government Pleader for R1 & R2 1/4

ORDER

There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. 2.This writ petition has been filed for a mandamus, to direct the 1st respondent to relax the maximum age limit i.e, 32 years for the vacant Post of Bill Clerk and Junior Assistant in the 2nd respondent's office. 3.On the date of the filing of the writ petition, the petitioner was aged about 47 years. The specific case of the petitioner is that the petitioner had registered with the 1st respondent Employment Exchange Board as early as 14.06.1885 and for almost 29 years, the petitioner has waited hoping that he will get a call letter from the 1st respondent. However, he did not get any such call letter from the 1st respondent. It is further submitted that the petitioner had completed his higher secondary education in the year 1985 and completed his degree (B.

Sc Physics) in the year 1989. However, after completing his higher education, the petitioner had registered with the 1st respondent on 14.06.1985 and the petitioner claims that there were vacancies in the post of Bill Clerk and Junior Assistant with the 2nd respondent. Hence, the petitioner has prayed for the relief.

2/4

4.As on date, the petitioner is aged about 53 years nearing the age of superannuation and even if petitioner's representation was directed to be considered then and there, it would serve no purpose. Unfortunately, the writ petition has been filed on 16.12.2014 and was listed for admission on 19.12.2014 thereafter the case has not been listed and it has come up for hearing today. Therefore, I do not find any reasons to keep this writ petition pending or to give any positive direction.

5.Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. 11.10.2022 Index: Yes/ No Internet : Yes/No jas To 1.The Assistant Director, District Employment Office, Nagapattinam District, Nagapattinam.

2.The Commissioner, Mayiladudhurai Municipality, Nagapattinam District.

3/4

C. SARAVANAN, J.

jas W.P.No.33875 of 2014 11.10.2022 4/4