Arockiyamary v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 08.09.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.12441, 12461 & 12462 of 2021 Arockiyamary : Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.15515/2021 Suganya : Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.15536/2021 Vs.

1.The District Collector, Pudukkottai, Pudukkottai District.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Aranthangi, Pudukkottai District.

3.The Tahsildar, Avudaiyarkovil Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

4.Muthumari 5.Vajiga Begam 1/6

6.Nagarajan 7.Mahamuni 8.Kalimuthu 9.Palanimuthu 10.Vasanthakumar : Respondents in both Writ Petitions COMMON PRAYER: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue Writs of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned selected candidate list dated 08.10.2020 issued by the third respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently, to appoint the petitioner to the post of Village Assistant.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.T.Sasidharan Tamilkani For Respondents 1 to 3 : Mr.S.S.Madhavan, Additional Government Pleader For Respondents 4 to 10 : Mr.M.Anbarasan, for M/s.KBS Law Office [In both Writ Petitions] COMMON ORDER The respective petitioners in these Writ Petitions have challenged the impugned selection list issued by the third respondent on the ground that it is arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional.

2/6

2.The petitioners claim that even though they are eligible to be selected, their names have been left out arbitrarily and illegally in the impugned selection list.

3.Counter has been filed by the respondents before this Court, disputing the contentions of the petitioner. According to them, since the respective petitioners have not satisfied the eligibility criteria, as they belong to a different communal category, they were not selected in the impugned selection list. According to the respondents, both the petitioners have not satisfied the criteria that they should be able to drive a bicycle. Hence, only due to the aforesaid reasons, their names does not find a place in the impugned selection list.

4.Admittedly, the post for which the petitioner in W.P. (MD)No.15515 of 2021 is aspiring for, is meant for MBC [DNC] category to which the petitioner in the said writ petition does not belong, whereas she belongs to BC Christian community. Similarly, the petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.15536 of 2021 belongs to MBC [DNC] category but does not belong to MBC [DNC] widow category, for which the said post was allocated. Only due to the fact that the respective petitioners have not satisfied the respective eligibility 3/6

criteria for being selected to the subject post, the respondents have not included the respective petitioners in the impugned selection list. The contention of the respondents as stated in their counter with regard to the respective petitioners' community status has also not been disputed. Since the petitioners have not satisfied the eligibility criteria, the question of entertaining these Writ Petitions does not arise. It is also to be noted that the respective petitioners are also not having the benefit of any interim order protecting their rights in these Writ Petitions. Even though these Writ Petitions have been filed in the year 2021 itself, after a lapse of almost five years, the question of granting any relief to the petitioners at this stage by this Court does not arise.

5.For the foregoing reasons, this Court does not find any merit in these Writ Petitions. Accordingly, these Writ Petition stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 08.09.2025 Index :Yes / No Internet : Yes / No NCC : Yes/No MR 4/6

To 1.The District Collector, Pudukkottai, Pudukkottai District.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Aranthangi, Pudukkottai District.

3.The Tahsildar, Avudaiyarkovil Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

5/6

ABDUL QUDDHOSE.

, J.

MR 08.09.2025 6/6