Thirusenthilnathan K v. The Secretary To Government
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:23.02.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI and W.M.P(MD)Nos.2416 and 2417 of 2023 K.Thirusenthilnathan ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Secretary to the Government, Department of Revenue, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.
3.The District Employment Officer, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.
4.The Tahsildar, Ramanathapuram Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.
5.Aravindakumar ... Respondents 1/7
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order in Na.Ka.P1/10506/2022, dated 14.01.2023 passed by the fourth respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently, direct the fourth respondent to appoint the petitioner as Village Assistant at Thoravalur Village, Ramanathapuram Taluk and District based on his application, dated 21.10.2022. For Petitioner :Mr.T.Veerakumar For Respondents :Mrs.K.Christy Theboral, Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed to quash the impugned order in Na.Ka.P1/10506/2022, dated 14.01.2023, passed by the fourth respondent as illegal and consequently, direct the fourth respondent to appoint the petitioner as Village Assistant at Thoravalur Village, Ramanathapuram Taluk and District based on his application, dated 21.10.2022.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he completed B.Lit., (Tamil) in the year 2010 and the same was duly registered before the 2/7
Employment Exchange. Adding to that, the petitioner obtained four wheeler licence also. The petitioner belongs to Backward Class Community and his wife belongs to Scheduled Caste Community and for which, the petitioner obtained an Inter-Caste Marriage certificate. While being so, a notification for the post of Village Assistant in Ramanathapuram Taluk and Ramanathapuram District has been issued on 07.10.2022 and accordingly, the petitioner applied for the same on 21.10.2022 with relevant documents. Thereafter, the petitioner appeared for written examination on 04.12.2022. In the selection process, the fifth respondent was selected as a successful candidate. Even though the petitioner is having better qualification, the fifth respondent was selected as successful candidate. Challenging the same, the petitioner has filed this writ petition with the aforesaid prayer.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that though the petitioner participated in the written examination, the result of the same was not published. Further, without publishing the result of the written examination and without conducting interview as per the notification, the fifth respondent was appointed as Village Panchayat Assistant for Thoravalur Village, which is per se illegal. The learned 3/7
counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the petitioner is a First Graduate and having inter-caste marriage certificate and the petitioner is a suitable person than the fifth respondent and therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.
4. Per contra, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that admittedly, all the correspondence were sent through on-line only. Earlier, the petitioner received an intimation through on-line and he appeared for the examination and again, a call letter was sent to him through on-line and SMS alert was also sent to his mobile number. However, the petitioner did not download the call letter and not attended the interview. Among the persons, who participated in the interview, the eligible person was selected. Accordingly, the fifth respondent was issued with the appointment order. However, the petitioner not even attended the interview and therefore, he cannot question the appointment of the fifth respondent.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents.
4/7
6. Though the petitioner claimed that he participated in the selection process and attended the written examination, however, he was not selected and issued with a call letter, the fact remains that, necessary documents were produced to show that intimation was given to the registered mobile number and call letter was sent through on-line. Further, the petitioner did not question the qualification of the fifth respondent, he only questioned the procedure adopted by the respondents, in which, he claimed that no call letter was sent to him, which is a disputed question, which cannot be decided under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and further without appearing for the interview, questioning the appointment of the fifth respondent, is not sustainable and hence, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.
7. In the result, this writ petition is dismissed. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 23.02.2023 NCC:Yes/No Index: Yes/No pm 5/7
To:
1.The Secretary to the Government, Department of Revenue, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.
3.The District Employment Officer, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.
4.The Tahsildar, Ramanathapuram Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.
6/7
M.DHANDAPANI, J.
pm W.P.(MD)No.2646 of 2023 23.02.2023 7/7