Madras High Court
M.Ranjitha vs The District Collector on 1 April, 2016
Author: T.Raja
Bench: T.Raja
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 01.04.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA
W.P.No.12331 of 2016
M.Ranjitha .. Petitioner
-vs-
1. The District Collector
Tiruvannamalai District Nutrition
Noon Meals Project
Collectorate
Tiruvannamalai Town & District 606 604
2. The Commissioner
Anakkavur Panchayat Union
Anakkavur, Cheyyar Taluk
Tiruvannamalai District 604 407
3. A.Kanniammal .. Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the respondents 1 and 2 herein and quash the impugned order of appointment passed by the first respondent herein in his Na.Ka.No.10791/2014/Sa.Vu.Thi.1 dated 29.02.2016 in favour of the third respondent herein and consequently appoint the petitioner herein as the Organizer in the Puratchithalaivar M.G.R. Nutrition Noon Meals Center situate at the Panchayat Union Elementary School, Thenmavanthal Village, Anakkavur Panchayat Union limits, Cheyyar Taluk in Tiruvannamalai District with immediate effect.
For Petitioner :: Mr.V.Ramana Reddy
For Respondents :: Mr.A.Kumar
Special Government Pleader for R1 & R2
ORDER
The petitioner has come to this Court challenging the appointment order issued in favour of the third respondent, on the ground that her name has been shown in the selection list in the first place, but the copy of the selection list, as pleaded by the learned counsel for the petitioner, could not be secured and produced before the Court. Secondly, he argued that the petitioner is a physically challenged person with 50% disability. Thirdly, he submitted that she has passed the Diploma in Elementary Education conducted by the State Board of School Examinations, Tamil Nadu after completing her Higher Secondary Course. In addition thereto, she has also produced the ration card, community certificate showing that she belongs to Scheduled Caste, income certificate obtained from the competent authority, voter's identity card, aadhar card etc., before the second respondent. But he pleaded that ignoring all these documents, the third respondent has been given appointment. He also submitted that in comparison with the petitioner's credentials, the third respondent is only possessing S.S.L.C. qualification.
2. But this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition for the following reasons. When the petitioner has come to this Court challenging the order of appointment given in favour of the third respondent, it is her fundamental duty to establish and satisfy the Court that the petitioner stands in a far better footing than the credentials of the third respondent. When the petitioner has failed to establish as to how far she is superior to the credentials of the third respondent, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition fails and it is dismissed. Consequently, W.M.P.Nos.10662 & 10663 of 2016 are also dismissed. No costs.
Index : yes/no 01.04.2016
ss
To
1. The District Collector
Tiruvannamalai District Nutrition
Noon Meals Project
Collectorate
Tiruvannamalai Town & District 606 604
2. The Commissioner
Anakkavur Panchayat Union
Anakkavur, Cheyyar Taluk
Tiruvannamalai District 604 407
T.RAJA, J.
ss
W.P.No.12331 of 2016
01.04.2016