R.Poonkodi v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.03.2018
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.(MD) No.6020 of 2011 R.Poonkodi ... Petitioner Vs
1. The District Collector, District Collector Office, (Organized Child Welfare Project) Thiruchirappalli, Thiruchirappalli District.
2. K.Selvarani ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order of appointment passed by the first respondent in nrK.M.v.3200/m1/09, dated 28.10.2010 appointing the second respondent as Principal Organizer of A.Pudupatti Anganwadi, quash the same and further direct the first respondent to appoint the petitioner for the above post. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar For R1 : Mr.M.Muthu Additional Government Pleader For R2 : Mr.S.Thirupathi
ORDER
The appointment order of the second respondent dated 28.10.2010, is under challenge in this writ petition.
2. The second respondent was appointed as Principal Organizer in A.Pudupatti Anganwadi. The petitioner claims that she is fully qualified for appointment to the post of Anganwadi Organizer and the petitioner was participated in the process of selection. However, her candidature was rejected and the second respondent was appointed.
3. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent states that the second respondent was appointed as Anganwadi organizer based on the selection conducted by the competent authorities. The writ petitioner was under age during the relevant point of time. Therefore, her candidature was not considered by the authorities concerned. The factual position was explained in Paragraph-7 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the first respondent is extracted hereunder: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
"7. It is respectfully submitted that regarding the averments made in Grounds even though the petitioner is the resident of A.Pudupatti Village, she is not eligible for the above said post. As per the Government order selected candidates are eligible from the age of 25 years to 35 years. The present petitioner was aged about 24 years at the time of interview. Hence she is not an eligible candidate for the above said post. Due to the above reason, she was not selected for the above said post. At the time of interview the performance of second respondent was appraised above the other candidates as she answered all questions relating to children welfare. Hence she was selected for the above post."
4. In view of the fact that, the writ petitioner was not at all eligible for appointment to the post during the relevant point of time, this Court is of an opinion that the petitioner is not made out any case for grant of relief as such sought for in this writ petition.
5. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. No Costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(T&P) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To The District Collector, District Collector Office, (Organized Child Welfare Project) Thiruchirappalli, Thiruchirappalli District.
+1cc to Mr.S.Thirupathi ,Advocate Sr.No.57335 +1cc to Spl.Government Pleader Sr.No.57571 PNN VB/SKN/RSK/SAR1/06.04.2018/2P/4C W.P.(MD) No.6020 of 2011 22.03.2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/