Madras High Court
P.Shanthi vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 21 December, 2022
Author: M.Dhandapani
Bench: M.Dhandapani
W.P.(MD)No.4825 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 21.12.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P.(MD)No.4825 of 2020
and
W.M.P.(MD)Nos.4198 to 4200 of 2020
P.Shanthi ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The State of Tamil Nadu,
Represented by its Secretary,
Department of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj,
Fort St.George,
Chennai - 600 009.
2. The District Collector,
Madurai District,
Madurai.
3. The Block Development Officer,
T.Kallupatti Panchayat Union,
T.Kallupatti,
Madurai District.
4. C.Sugapriya ... Respondents
_________
Page 1 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.4825 of 2020
PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the
records relating to the impugned order passed by the third respondent in his
proceedings in Na.Ka.No.808/2018/Vu1 dated 05.11.2019 and quash the
same as illegal, ultravirus without any authority without any sanction and
consequently to direct the third respondent herein to appoint the petitioner
for the post of Village Panchayat Secretary of Matthakarai Village, Peraiyur
Taluk, Madurai District.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sadeskumar
For Respondents : Mr.S.P.Maharajan
Special Govt. Pleader for R1 to R3
Mr.S.Mohammed Suhil
for M/s.Ajmal Associates for R4
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed to call for the records of the impugned order passed by the third respondent vide proceedings in Na.Ka.No.808/2018/Vu1, dated 05.11.2019, quash the same and consequently, direct the third respondent herein to appoint the petitioner for the post of Village Panchayat Secretary of Matthakarai Village, Peraiyur Taluk, Madurai District.
_________ Page 2 of 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.4825 of 2020
2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner's husband passed away on 03.06.2014 leaving behind the petitioner and two children. The petitioner has completed 10th Standard during the year 1999 and she has also completed Nursing Assistant / Auxiliary Course and the same have been registered before the District Employment Office, Madurai. She has also possessed priority category as Destitute Widow and the same has also been registered in the Employment Registered Office with the seniority, dated 26.10.2015. In the said circumstances, the third respondent has published a Notification calling for application to fill up the post of Village Panchayat Secretary, dated 27.03.2018 for Matthakarai Village for the rotation of BC Women other than Muslims category. As per the said Notification, the petitioner applied for the said post along with her Educational Qualification, Nativity Certificate, Community Certificate and Priority Certificate as Destitute Widow and Ex-Serviceman Dependency Certificate. On satisfying with the same, the third respondent called the petitioner for interview vide proceedings, dated 05.02.2019. Thereafter, the petitioner attended the interview on 14.02.2019 and produced all documents before the Committee. However, without considering the petitioner's candidature and qualification, _________ Page 3 of 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.4825 of 2020 the fourth respondent was selected. Challenging the same, the present Writ Petition.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is a Destitute Widow and daughter of Ex-Serviceman and she also obtained an Ex-Serviceman Dependency Certificate. Apart from that, she has also completed Nursing Assistant / Auxiliary Course and the age of the petitioner is 34 years, whereas, the age of the fourth respondent is only 20 years. At the time of interview, the fourth respondent did not possess the other qualifications which were possessed by the petitioner. Hence, the appointment of the fourth respondent is not sustainable and arbitrary and accordingly, he prayed for appropriate orders.
4. Per contra, the learned Special Government Pleader and learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent would submit that the post of Village Panchayat Secretary, Matthakarai Village was reserved for Backward Classes (other than Muslims) (non-priority) candidates and as such, possessing Destitute Widow Certificate has no relevance in the _________ Page 4 of 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.4825 of 2020 selection. The petitioner and the fourth respondent are residing in the same Village Panchayat and are hailing from BC Community. The petitioner's age is 34 years and the fourth respondent's age is 20 years. Both have studied upto 10th Standard and seven candidates were short-listed and interviewed. During the interview, the fourth respondent was preferred over other six candidates including the petitioner herein. The selection of the fourth respondent is based on Expert Committee's opinion / Selection Committee that was mainly based on the performance of the fourth respondent in the oral test / interview. The fourth respondent joined as Village Panchayat Secretary, Matthakarai Village, on 06.11.2019. The fourth respondent has been selected as per the parameters prescribed in G.O.(Ms).No.175, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (E5) Department, dated 05.12.2006 read with G.O.(Ms)No.72, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (E5) Department, dated 09.07.2013. Hence, he prayed for the dismissal of this Writ Petition.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the materials placed before this Court.
_________ Page 5 of 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.4825 of 2020
6. The facts in the present case are not in dispute. Admittedly, the petitioner and the fourth respondent participated in the selection process for the post of Village Panchayat Secretary in Matthakarai Village. The age of the petitioner and the fourth respondent are not in dispute. Whereas, the petitioner's age is 34 and the fourth respondent's age is 20. The qualifications possessed by the petitioner and the fourth respondent are not in dispute and both of them possessed 10th Standard. However, the petitioner possessed more qualification than the fourth respondent. The petitioner additionally possessed Nursing Assistant / Auxiliary Course and she is a Destitute Widow and she has also obtained an Ex-Serviceman Dependency Certificate. However, both of them are hailing from the same Village.
7. In order to ascertain the selection process conducted by the Selection Committee, this Court, called for the records and accordingly, records have been produced before this Court. It is seen that fifty candidates have applied for the said post. Now, the issue before this Court is with reference to the petitioner and the fourth respondent. The details of the petitioner and the fourth respondent are as follows:
_________ Page 6 of 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.4825 of 2020 tpz;zg;gjhhpd; bgah;
gpwe;j khw;Wj; jpwdhsp–
t/v kw;Wk; fzth;-jfg;gdhh;
gpwe;j njjp njjpapd; tpjit fztdhy;
z; bgah;. KG Kfthp kw;Wk;
go taJ iftplg;gl;ltuh
ifngrp vz;
Rfg;gphpah
f-bg/fhh;j;jpf;
32-4/fpHf;FbjU
11 bghpag{yhk;g;gl;o 28.02.1999 20 -
kj;jf;fiu
bghpag{yhk;g;gl;o
(m";ry;)
gh/rhe;jp
f-bg/ghy;ghz;o fpHf;FbjU
13 05.05.1984 34 tpjit
bghpag{yhk;gl;o kj;jf;fiu
bghpag{yhk;gl;o (m";ry;)
8. The comparative statement of the petitioner as well as the fourth respondent in the counter affidavit is as follows:
Sl. 4th Respondent –
Particulars Petitioner-Shanthi
No. C.Sugapriya
1 Community BC/Agamudayar BC/Maravar
2 Age 34 21
Periyapoolampatti, Periyapoolampatti,
3 Residence Mathakarai (nearby Mathakarai Village
Village) (nearby Village)
Educational
4 10th Standard 10th Standard
Qualification
_________
Page 7 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.4825 of 2020
9. However, there was a variation in the selection process and the counter filed by the third respondent. In the selection process, the petitioner's candidature is mentioned as a Widow, whereas, in the counter, the third respondent did not mention about the marital status. Further, it is also not in dispute that the petitioner is a Destitute Widow and obtained Ex-Serviceman Dependency Certificate. Apart from that, the petitioner also possessed Nursing Assistant / Auxiliary Course. The comparative statement reveals that the petitioner is more suitable than the fourth respondent. As per the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994, the appointing authority is the Village President, however, in the absence of the elected President, based on the direction issued by the District Collector, the Block Development Officer deserved to fill up the post through open market.
10. Hence, the selection process of the third respondent is arbitrary and therefore, the appointment order issued in favour of the fourth respondent is liable to be interfered with and accordingly, the impugned _________ Page 8 of 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.4825 of 2020 order passed by the third respondent is set aside. The third respondent is directed to issue posting order to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
11. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed. No costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
21.12.2022 Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No vji To
1. The Secretary, The State of Tamil Nadu, Department of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.
2. The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.
3. The Block Development Officer, T.Kallupatti Panchayat Union, T.Kallupatti, _________ Page 9 of 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.4825 of 2020 Madurai District.
_________ Page 10 of 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.4825 of 2020 M.DHANDAPANI,J.
vji W.P.(MD)No.4825 of 2020 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.4198 to 4200 of 2020 21.12.2022 _________ Page 11 of 11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis