S.Bharathi, v. The District Collector,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 04.09.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.(MD)No.16633 of 2017 and W.M.P.(MD)No.13233 of 2017 S.Bharathi : Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Dindigul District.

2.The Project Officer, Integrated Child Development Scheme, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

3.The Child Development Project Officer, Vadamadurai Block, Dindigul District.

: Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents herein to consider the petitioner for selection and to appoint the petitioner as Primary Anganwadi worker in the place of Old Sithuvarpatti Anganwadi Center, Vadamadurai Block, Vedasandur Taluk, Dindigul District.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.K.Manickam For Respondents : Mr.R.Karthikeyan Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

*********** By consent of both parties, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

2.The petitioner has come to this Court seeking a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents herein to consider the petitioner for selection and to appoint the petitioner as Primary Anganwadi worker in the place of Old Sithuvarpatti Anganwadi Center, Vadamadurai Block, Vedasandur Taluk, Dindigul District. 3.Heard Mr.A.K.Manickam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.R.Karthikeyan, learned Additional Government

Pleader appearing for the respondents.

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that when applications were invited for the post of Primary Anganwadi workers in Vadamadurai Block, Dindigul District, the petitioner possessing all the requisite qualification applied for the post of Anganwadi worker in the place of Old Sithuvarpatti Centre, Vadamadurai Block, Dindigul District.

On receipt of the application made by the petitioner, the third respondent vide proceedings dated 28.08.2017 called the petitioner for personal interview which was scheduled to be held on 30.08.2017. 5.When the petitioner took part in the interview held on 30.08.2017, in the office of the third respondent, the third respondent orally informed the petitioner that her application was rejected on the ground that she has mentioned her husband's name in the application form instead of her father's name. It is known as to how the third respondent could reject the petitioner's application though, the petitioner has given correct particulars of her husband as she is a married lady.

6.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents denying the same would submit that the third respondent would not have rejected the candidature of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner had mentioned the name of her husband in the application form instead of her father's name. He would further submit that the selection process is still going on and therefore, the third respondent will permit the petitioner to take part in the selection process. Hence, he pleaded that to that extent an order may be passed by this Court. 7.Considering the limited scope of the prayer sought for by the petitioner, this Court hereby directs the third respondent to permit the petitioner to take part in the personal interview. The third respondent is further directed to consider the case of the petitioner on par with others while preparing the selection list. 8.The Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above direction. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The District Collector, Dindigul District.

2.The Project Officer, Integrated Child Development Scheme, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

3.The Child Development Project Officer, Vadamadurai Block, Dindigul District.

+1cc to Mr.A.K.MANICKAM,Advocate,SR.76256 +1cc to M/S.Special Government Pleader,SR.76566 W.P.(MD)No.16633 of 2017 04.09.2017 MR/MRN KK/SKN RSK/SAR 3/05.09.2017/ 3P- 6C