Madras High Court
G.Sivasankari vs The District Collector on 22 June, 2022
Author: D. Krishnakumar
Bench: D.Krishnakumar
W.P.No.3504 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated 22.06.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
W.P.No.3504 of 2020 and
WMP No.4099 of 2020
G.Sivasankari ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The District Collector,
Villupuram District,
Villupuram.
2. The Child Development and Planning Officer,
Koliyanur Block, Villupuram District.
3. Noon Meal Organizer,
Thodanthanur-II,
Koliyanur Post, Villupuram District.
4. M.Sankari Devi ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India seeking to issue a Writ of Declaration to declare that the
appointment of the 4th respondent as Noon Meal Organiser in the
Thodanthanur-II, Panchayat Union, Villupuram District as illegal,
arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents 1 to
3 to appoint the petitioner as noon meal organiser at Thodanthnur-II,
Page 1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.3504 of 2020
Koliyanur Panchayat Union, Villupuram District by considering the
petitioner's representation dated 18.10.2019 to the first respondent.
For petitioner : Mr.T.Elumalai
For respondents : Mr.S.Rajesh, Govt.Advocate
for R1 to R3
Mr.M.Ramadass for R4.
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed to declare that the appointment of the 4th respondent as Noon Meal Organiser in the Thodanthanur-II, Panchayat Union, Villupuram District as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 to appoint the petitioner as noon meal organiser in that place by considering the petitioner's representation dated 18.10.2019. .
2. The first and second respondents invited applications for direct recruitment to the post of Noon meal organizer and the petitioner applied for the same and attended interview on 22.02.2019 and furnished all the required documents. Though the petitioner was selected for the post of noon meal organizer by the second respondent Page 2 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.3504 of 2020 in the third respondent Anganwadi, later, the petitioner came to understand that the 4th respondent was appointed as Principal Noon meal organizer in that place. According to the petitioner, she is a widow and having two minor children and residing at Panangkuppam Village, nearing to the third respondent Anganwadi and she is poor and struggling to manage her day-to-day life for her lively hood. But the 4th respondent is residing with her husband at Kumarakuppam Village and her husband is working and earning a very good salary and they also have more than 3 acres of agricultural land in the same village. Therefore, the petitioner gave representation on 18.10.2019 to the first respondent. But, it was not considered. Hence, this writ petition.
3. The fourth respondent filed counter affidavit stating that she is residing at Kumarakuppam Village, which is, within three kilometers from the third respondent Anganwadi and she is fully qualified with all eligible criteria to get the above post and hence, the writ petition is not maintainable. The fourth respondent has also produced the copies of the documents to support her contentions.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted Page 3 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.3504 of 2020 that the appointing authority has not followed the G.O.No.163 dated 18.08.2010 while appointing the 4th respondent, and she is residing at Kumarakuppam Village, which is 5 kilometers away from the third respondent Anganwadi and hence, the appointment order issued in favour of the fourth respondent is contrary to the above said Government Order. He further submitted that, the petitioner is residing within three kilometers from the third respondent Anganwadi and to prove the same, the Village Administrative Officer has given a Certificate and she is a deserving candidate to get the above job. He also produced the above said Certificate issued by the Village Administrative Office before this Court. But, at the time of filing writ petition, the above Certificate has not been enclosed in the typed set of papers. Therefore, it is for the first respondent namely District Collector, Villupuram District to consider the representation of the petitioner and to take appropriate decision.
5. Accordingly, this court is inclined to pass the following order.
i) The petitioner is directed to make a fresh representation along with the copy of this order and with relevant documents, within one Page 4 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.3504 of 2020 week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
ii) On receipt of such representation, the first respondent is directed to conduct detailed enquiry, after affording opportunity to petitioner as well as the fourth respondent and to pass orders on merits and accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of representation.
6. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected writ miscellaneous petition is closed.
22.06.2022 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No mst To
1. The District Collector, Villupuram District, Villupuram.
2. The Child Development and Planning Officer, Koliyanur Block, Villupuram District.
3. Noon Meal Organizer, Thodanthanur-II, Page 5 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.3504 of 2020 Koliyanur Post, Villupuram District.
Page 6 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.3504 of 2020 D. KRISHNAKUMAR, J.
mst W.P.No.3504 of 2020 22.06.2022 Page 7 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis