C.Nishanthini v. The Commissioner

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 12-04-2019

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No.26026 of 2018 C.Nishanthini .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The Commissioner, Panchayat Union, Mel Bhuvanagiri, Cuddalore District.

2.The District Collector, Cuddalore District at Cuddalore.

.. Respondents Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 2.4.2018 forthwith.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Arasuganesan For Respondents : Mr.A.N.Thambidurai, Special Government Pleader.

O R D E R

The relief sought for in the present writ petition is for a direction to direct the second respondent to consider the representation submitted by the writ petitioner on 2.4.2018.

2. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner states that pursuant to the Recruitment Notification issued by the first respondent, the writ petitioner participated in the process of selection for appointment to the post of Noon Meal Organizer. The writ petitioner attended the interview for the said post on 24.2.2017. However, the writ petitioner was not appointed in the said post. Thus, the writ petitioner is constrained to move the present writ petition.

3. Appointment can never be claimed as a matter of legal right. All appointments are to be made strictly in accordance with the Recruitment Rules in force.

4. The writ petitioner has not raised any allegation in respect of the selection process nor substantiated any irregularity or illegality in the process of selection. The process of selection was not concluded and no person was appointed.

5. Under these circumstances, the writ petitioner states that the representation submitted by the writ petitioner cannot be considered and the writ petitioner cannot be appointed to the post of Noon Meal Organizer.

6. Mere participation in the process of selection would not confer any right on the writ petitioner to seek appointment. The authorities competent are empowered to cancel the appointment or proceed with the selection process. Such administrative decisions taken by the respondents in the interest of public administration cannot be questioned by a candidate, who participated in the process of selection.

7. In the present case on hand, the writ petitioner attended the interview and no appointment order has been issued to the writ petitioner.

8. This being the factum, this Court cannot issue any direction to the authorities to consider the representation submitted by the writ petitioner.

9. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Commissioner, Panchayat Union, Mel Bhuvanagiri, Cuddalore District.

2.The District Collector, Cuddalore District at Cuddalore.

+1cc to M/S.A.Arasu Ganesan, Advocate Sr.36546 WP 26026 of 2018 ak[co] srg 6/5/2019