D. Selvapriya, v. The District Collector,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 15.06.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P(MD).No.1818 of 2011 and M.P.(MD).Nos.1 and 2 of 2011 **** D.Selvapriya ...

Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

2.Child Development Project Officer, Child Development Project Office, T.Kallupatti, Madurai District.

3.D.Murugeswari ...

Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a WRIT OF CERTIORARIFIED MANDAMUS calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the 1st Respondent in Che.Mu.Na.Ka.No.1821/A1/2010 dated 07-02-2011 and quash the same and consequently direct the 1st Respondent to appoint the Petitioner as Anganvadi Assistant at Karaikeni, Peraiyur Taluk, Madurai District.

For petitioner : Mr.R.R.Kannan For R.1&2 : Mr.G.Muthukannan For R.3 : Mr.S.Muniyandi ********

ORDER

Mrs.D.Selvapriaya, having lost a chance of getting selected to the post of Anganvadi Assistant at Karaikeni, Anganwadi Centre, Madurai District, in the selection held on 24.09.2010 at the Child Development Project Office, Subramania Kovil Street, Periyur, has come to this Court, challenging the order of appointment issued to the third respondent, by name, Mrs.D.Murugeswari, on the ground that the impugned order of the first respondent in selecting the third respondent and leaving the petitioner is arbitrary and mala fide and therefore, the same is unsustainable in the eye of law, for the reason that, when the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

petitioner is a fully qualified candidate and also hailing from the same village, the first respondent should not have selected the third respondent, who, originally a resident of Muthulingapuram Village only recently, has shifted her residence to Karaikeni Village.

2. This Court is unable find any merit in the contentions of the petitioner for the reason that the third respondent, even according to the petitioner, has already shifted to the place where the Anganvadi situates. More over, no interim order was passed against the third respondent, who has been working in the Anganwadi Centre at Karaikeni, ever since the date of her selection. Prima facie, this Court does not find any infirmity, as alleged by the petitioner, in the appointment order issued in favour of the third respondent, by the first respondent.

3. In view of the above, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AE) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

2.Child Development Project Officer, Child Development Project Office, T.Kallupatti, Madurai District.

+1cc to Mr.R.R.Kannan, Advocate SR.30523 +1cc to M/S.THE SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SR NO:30838 SSM JA-SK-SKN/24.6.2016/2P:5C W.P(MD).No.1818 of 2011 15.06.2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/