Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

N.Srijayanthi vs Government Of Tamil Nadu on 9 June, 2022

Author: S.M.Subramaniam

Bench: S.M.Subramaniam

                                                                               W.P.No.7210 of 2014

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                DATED : 09.06.2022

                                                       CORAM

                              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

                                               W.P.No.7210 of 2014
                     N.Srijayanthi                       ...       Petitioner
                                                        Vs.
                     1.Government of Tamil Nadu
                       Rep.by its Secretary
                       Higher Education Department
                       Fort St.George,Chennai – 600 009.

                     2.The Director of School Education
                       Chennai – 600 006.

                     3.District Educational Officer cum
                       Head of the Selection Committee
                       Office of the District Educational Officer
                       Dharmapuri.

                     4.P.Shanthi
                     5.V.Umapathy
                     6.C.Jeyanthi
                     7.R.Manimala                           ...         Respondents

                     PRAYER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
                     of India praying for an issuance of a Writ of Declaration, declaring the
                     action of the 3rd respondent in appointing the respondent Nos.4 to 7 as
                     Watchman as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and consequently, direct
                     the respondent Nos.1 to 3 to appoint the petitioner in the post of Watchman
                     pursuant to certificate verification done by the 2nd respondent on 23.06.2012
                     and on 17.08.2012 within the time frame stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.

                     1/5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                       W.P.No.7210 of 2014

                                        For Petitioner      : Ms.S.Kaavya
                                                              for Mr.Balan Haridas
                                        For Respondent       : Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal
                                        Nos.1 to 3             Additional Government Pleader

                                                             ORDER

The case on hand is a classic case, where, on account of the delay in disposal of the case, this Court is unable to consider the manner, in which, the selection was conducted for appointment to the post of Watchman during the year 2012. On account of efflux of time and in view of the fact that the appointed candidates are working for about 10 years, it would be rather difficult to unsettle the settled appointment made 10 years back.

2.The petitioner states that she participated in the process of selection for appointment to the post of Watchman in Government School. Her name was sponsored through the District Employment Exchange and without conducting any transparent selection, the authorities have appointed the respondents 4 to 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated that the selection was not conducted in an appropriate manner and the assessment and suitability has not been made and thus, the selection itself is to be set aside.

2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.7210 of 2014

3.This Court is of the considered opinion that the selection during the relevant point of time was conducted for appointment to the post of Watchman and the procedures adopted 10 years back for selection cannot be now interfered with by this Court. However, the selection was conducted by inviting the list of candidates from the Employment Exchange. Mere employment registration seniority would not confer any right for employment. The assessment made by the selection authority is the basis for appointment. The Court cannot interfere with the assessment made by the selection committee unless such selection is stained with the allegation of malafides or certain corrupt activities are established. The assessment of the selection committee became final and Court cannot sit as an expert body in appeal over the decision taken by the selection committee. In the present case, the appointment was made in the year 2012 and the appointed candidates are working for the past 10 years and moreover, the petitioner is aged about 45 years and in such circumstances, no relief can be considered in respect of the present writ petitioner and with reference to the relief sought for.

3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.7210 of 2014

4.Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

Index : Yes / No 09.06.2022 Internet: Yes /No sms/sli To

1.Government of Tamil Nadu Rep.by its Secretary Higher Education Department Fort St.George,Chennai – 600 009.

2.The Director of School Education Chennai – 600 006.

3.District Educational Officer cum Head of the Selection Committee Office of the District Educational Officer Dharmapuri.

4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.7210 of 2014 S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.

sms/sli W.P.No.7210 of 2014 09.06.2022 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis