Madras High Court
R.Rajapriya vs The Director on 21 June, 2019
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 21.06.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.(MD)No.1978 of 2015
and
M.P.(MD).Nos.1 and 2 of 2015
R.Rajapriya ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Director,
Employment & Training
Guindy,
Chennai 600 032.
2.The Joint Director (Craftsman Training)
Employment & Training,
Guindy, Chennai600 032.
3.The Regional Joint Director of Training,
Khajamalai, Trichy-20
4.The Principal,
Government Industrial Training Institute
Vallam Road, Thanjavur-8. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents
herein to appoint the petitioner herein in one of the posts of
Trainer/Full Time Contract Faculty in the 4th respondent as per her
selection dated 06.11.2013 in the Roaster System in the interview
dated 06.11.2014 without any further delay.
http://www.judis.nic.in
2
For Petitioner : M/s.C.Padmaraj
For R1 to R4 : Mr.K.Mu.Muthu
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner in one of the post of Trainer/Full Time Contract Faculty in the fourth respondent Institute, as per her selection dated 06.11.2013 in the roster system in the interview dated 06.11.2014.
2.The learned counsel for the writ petitioner states that the petitioner is continuing as a Contract Faculty as of now, this Court is the considered opinion that if at all need arises and the rule permits, the respondents are at liberty to continue the writ petitioner in her capacity as Contract Faculty. However, permanent appointment cannot be granted in violation of the recruitment rules in force. Long continuance of the Contract Faculty is also to be reconsidered. However, the writ petitioner is at liberty to participate in the process of selection for appointing to the regular post if any notification is issued. As far as the Contract Faculty is concerned, the writ petitioner cannot claim any right and if at all she is continuing as such, it is for the respondents to take a http://www.judis.nic.in 3 decision in this regard with reference to the rules in force. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that any vacancies are available to engage the Contract Faculty, that is the fact, it is left open to the respondents to ascertain the situation and take a decision on merits and in accordance with law.
3.With the above observation, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
21.06.2019 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Ns To
1.The Director, Employment & Training Guindy, Chennai 600 032.
2.The Joint Director (Craftsman Training) Employment & Training, Guindy, Chennai600 032.
3.The Regional Joint Director of Training, Khajamalai, Trichy-20
4.The Principal, Government Industrial Training Institute Vallam Road, Thanjavur-8.
http://www.judis.nic.in 4 S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.
Ns W.P.(MD)No.1978 of 2015 and M.P.(MD).Nos.1 and 2 of 2015 21.06.2019 http://www.judis.nic.in