Madras High CourtWP(MD)/8980/2018disposed of

S.Savithiri, v. The District Collector

2018-06-07Honourable Mr Justice R. Suresh Kumar3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.06.2018

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR W.P.(MD).No.8980 of 2018 S.Savithiri ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector, Trichy District, Trichy 620 001.

2. The Personal Assistant to the District Collector, Noon Meal Section, Office of the District Collector, Trichy 620 001.

3. The Block Development Officer, Vaiyampatti Panchayat, Vaiyampatti, Manapparai Taluk, Trichy District.

4. The Additional Director, District Panchayat Development Camp, Trichy District.

5. The Zonal Officer (Interview), Noon Meal Organiser Post, Trichy.

6. Sivajayanthi ... Respondents PRAYER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to cancel the appointment of sixth respondent and to appoint the petitioner in the post of Noon Meal Organiser in Veramalaipatti Union Panchayat Primary School in Vaiyampatti Panchayat of Manapparai Taluk of Trichy District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 05.04.2018, within the period stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner : M/s. S.Varnikhaa For R1,R2,R4 & R5 : Mr.D.Muruganandam Additional Government Pleader For R3 : Mrs.J.Padhmavathi Devi Special Government Pleader

O R D E R

The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to cancel the appointment of sixth respondent and to appoint the petitioner in the post of Noon Meal Organiser in Veramalaipatti Union Panchayat Primary School in Vaiyampatti Panchayat of Manapparai Taluk of Trichy District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 05.04.2018, within the period stipulated by this Court.

2. Heard Mrs.S.Varnikhaa, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.D.Muruganandam, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1,2,4 and 5 and Mrs.J.Padhmavadhi, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent No.3.

3. Since no adverse order is going to be passed against the sixth respondent, notice to the sixth respondent is dispensed with.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that though a larger prayer has been sought for in the writ petition, the petitioner would be confined to the prayer that if her representation dated 05.04.2018 is directed to be considered by the first respondent and order to that effect is directed to be passed, the petitioner would be satisfied.

5. I have heard the learned Additional Government Pleader, who would submit that the sixth respondent has already been appointed as a Noon Meal Organiser and the post for which the petitioner also competent. Nevertheless, since the petitioner had given a representation making certain allegations against the sixth respondent that would be considered and order to that effect would be passed within a time frame that may be fixed by this Court.

6. Considering the said submissions made by both sides, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions that the petitioner's representation dated 05.04.2018 shall be considered by the first respondent on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks and order to that effect be passed within the said time by the said respondent.

7. While considering the same, the allegation made by the petitioner against the appointment of the sixth respondent shall also be considered and if any, notice can be given to the sixth respondent also.

8. With these directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

Sd/ Assistant Registrar(T&P) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-I)