Skip to content


R. Eswaran Vs. The District Collector/ Inspector of Panchayat, Office of the District Collector, Ramanathapuram District and Others - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai Madurai High Court
Decided On
Case NumberW.P (MD).No. 16657 of 2016 & W.M.P.(MD).No. 12107 of 2016
Judge
AppellantR. Eswaran
RespondentThe District Collector/ Inspector of Panchayat, Office of the District Collector, Ramanathapuram District and Others
Excerpt:
.....of watchman. 2. pursuant to the letter of the first respondent dated 21.11.2015, the petitioner attended the interview on 30.11.2015 along with 17 others. however, subsequently, he came to know that, the respondents have not followed 3% reservation for arunthathiyar community as per g.o.ms.no.142, employment and administrative reforms (k) department, dated 14.10.2009. in this regard, he has given a representation on 30.11.2015 to the respondents to cancel interview. since the said representation having not been respond, the petitioner is before this court. 3. be that as it may, once the petitioner attended the interview and having not been selected, as to how he wanted to cancel the interview which took place on 30.11.2015 without any valid reason. therefore, this court is of the view.....
Judgment:

(Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records connected with the order passed by the respondent NO.1 in Na.Ka.Va4/3985/2015 dated 21.11.2015 and quash the same as illegal consequently to direct the respondents to appoint me as watchman in Respondent No.1 department after follow the procedure in accordance with law.)

1. The petitioner challenges the order of the first respondent dated 21.11.2015 whereby the incumbents were asked to appear before the first respondent along with necessary Certificates to fill up the post of Watchman.

2. Pursuant to the letter of the first respondent dated 21.11.2015, the petitioner attended the interview on 30.11.2015 along with 17 others. However, subsequently, he came to know that, the respondents have not followed 3% reservation for Arunthathiyar Community as per G.O.Ms.No.142, Employment and Administrative Reforms (K) Department, dated 14.10.2009. In this regard, he has given a representation on 30.11.2015 to the respondents to cancel interview. Since the said representation having not been respond, the petitioner is before this Court.

3. Be that as it may, once the petitioner attended the interview and having not been selected, as to how he wanted to cancel the interview which took place on 30.11.2015 without any valid reason. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the reason found by the petitioner is only an after-thought to derail the process. Further, the interview is said to have taken place on 30.11.2015. There is not even an averment nor argument advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioner as to the delay in filing this Writ Petition. The affidavit is completely bereft of basic details. Therefore, this Writ Petition lacks merit and substance and it is liable to be dismissed.

4. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //