Murugesh Kumar v. The Director Of Municipal Administration
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 28.11.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN Murugesh Kumar : Petitioner Vs.
1.The Director of Municipal Administration, Saidapet, Chennai.
2.The Director Rural Development and Panchayath Raj Department, Krishnagiri.
3.The District Collector, Krishangiri, Krishnagiri District.
4.The Block Development Officer, (Development) Barugur, Krishnagiri District.
5.The Panchayat President, Pandaseemanur Village, Barugur Taluk, Krishnagiri District. : Respondents 1/5
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records in connection with the impugned order of the third respondent in connection with Notice 24817/2025/M3 dated 09.10.2025 in respect of Pandaseemanur Village, Bargur Taluk, Krishnagiri District for the post of Panchayat Secretary in Pandaseemanur Village Panchayat with all benefits as per selection list issued by the respondents 1 to 4 in Pandamaseemanur Village Panchayat, Barugur Taluk, Krishnagiri District with all back wages.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Thiruvengadam For Respondents : Mr.V.Jeevagiridharan Additional Government Pleader for R1 to R3 Mr.K.H.Ravikumar Government Advocate for R4 and R5
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the notification issued by the third respondent dated 09.10.2025 thereby invited applications insofar as the Pandaseemanur Village, Bargur Taluk, Krishnagiri District for filling up the post of Panchayat Secretary.
2. The petitioner belongs to SC Arundhathiyar community and hailing from Dhoddikollpalli village, Pandaseemanur Post, Barugur Taluk, Krishangiri District. In the year 2019, the third respondent issued notification inviting application for 2/5
appointment of Village Secretary, insofar as Pandaseemanur Village, Bargur Taluk, Krishnagiri District. However, the petitioner was not selected since the petitioner was not coming under the zone of selection. The said village was earmarked for SC Arundhathiyar in the year 2019. Now the third respondent issued notification inviting applications to fill up the post of Panchayat Secretary for the entire Krishnagiri District, in which, Pandaseemanur Village is categorized for general turn. Though the petitioner can participate in the selection process under the general quota for his village, the petitioner without participating in the selection process, simply challenged the very notification on the ground that his village is now allotted for general quota.
On rotation every selection quota rota to be followed by the third respondent and accordingly Pandaseemanur Village is now coming under the general turn. That apart, for the entire district, the third respondent invited applications to fill up the post of 50 panchayat Secretary, the petitioner could have very well applied for the post. However, the petitioner did not submit any application to the post of Panchayat Secretary since the cut of date was also now expired as on 09.11.2015. In fact the writ petition itself filed on 14.11.2025.
3/5
3. In view of the above, this Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the third respondent dated 09.10.2025. Therefore, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, WMP Nos.50880 and 50886 of 2025 are closed.
28.11.2025 Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order mrn To 1.The Director of Municipal Administration, Saidapet, Chennai.
2.The Director Rural Development and Panchayath Raj Department, Krishnagiri.
3.The District Collector, Krishangiri, Krishnagiri District.
4.The Block Development Officer, (Development) Barugur, Krishnagiri District.
5.The Panchayat President, Pandaseemanur Village, Barugur Taluk, Krishnagiri District.
4/5
G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN , J.
(mrn) 28.11.2025 5/5