Perumayee v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 04.09.2018

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN W.P.(MD)No.19104 of 2018 Perumayee ...

Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

2.The Project Officer, Children Development Project Office, Mariyayeepatti, A.Pirivu, Batalagundu, Dindigul.

...

Respondents PRAYER: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 18.08.2018 and to appoint the petitioner as Assistant in Anganvadi Centre, Eluvanampatti Village, Nilakottai Taluk, Dindigul District under the special quota.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Balaji For Respondents : Mr.R.Sethuraman, Spl.G.P.

O R D E R

The petitioner has come forward with the present Writ petition to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 18.08.2018 and to appoint him as Assistant in an anganvadi centre at Eluvanampatti Village, Nilakottai Taluk, Dindigul District under the special quota. 2.Mr.R.Sethuraman, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. By consent, the Writ petition itself is take up for final hearing.

3.The case of the petitioner is that he must be appointed as Anganvadi under Scheduled Caste and that he is entitled for the preference under inter-caste marriage quota.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4.The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that including the petitioner, three persons have attended for the said interview and the result is yet to be declared.

5.If the case of the petitioner would be considered under inter-caste marriage / Scheduled Caste community quota, many the persons like that of the petitioner, who have attended interview, shall approach this Court with very same relief. Hence, it is for the respondents to consider all the cases for appointment, including the petitioner. Therefore, giving a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation will not give finality to the issue on hand. However, it would create multiplicity of proceedings. In such view of the matter, the request of the petitioner is rejected.

6.Accordingly, this Writ petition is dismissed. The dismissal of the Writ petition will not preclude the respondents from considering the case of the petitioner if the petitioner is other eligible. No costs.

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

2.The Project Officer, Children Development Project Office, Mariyayeepatti, A.Pirivu, Batalagundu, Dindigul.

+1cc to Special Government Pleader, Sr.No.82808. +1cc to Mr.S.Balaji, Advocate, Sr.No.82015.

W.P.(MD)No.19104 of 2018 04.09.2018 nbj https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ RAM-NM/RP/SAR 1/05.12.2018/2P/5C