V. Anandarajan v. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board rep. By its Chairman & Another
2007-09-19
M.CHOCKALINGAM
body2007
DigiLaw.ai
Judgment :- The petitioner has brought forth this writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider and appoint the petitioner to the post of Assistant Engineer (Electrical) without giving preference to the apprenticeship trainees and restrict the claim of the apprenticeship trainees upto the year 1999. 2. The affidavit in support of the petition is perused. The Court heard the learned Counsel on either side. 3. The only grievance of the petitioner is that he appeared for the interview before the Selection Committee for the post of Assistant Engineer (Electrical) on 19. 2005; that despite the same, he did not receive any intimation or information; that on verification, he came to know that the apprenticeship trainees were preferred and given appointment, but not the petitioner; and under the circumstances, it has become necessary to file this writ petition. 4. The learned Counsel for the respondents would submit that in the instant case, it is true that an interview was conducted by the respondent department for the post of Assistant Engineer (Electrical); that it is not correct to state that the apprenticeship trainees were preferred; but, the cut off mark was fixed at 69.47; that the petitioner has secured only 63.37; that by that, the petitioner did not make himself eligible among the persons for the appointment, and that is why, the petitioner could not be given appointment by the department. 5. After hearing both sides, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a case where the petitioner cannot have the relief before this Court for the simple reason that there was a cut off mark fixed at the time of the interview; but, the petitioner has secured below the same. In such circumstances, the appointment of the petitioner could not be considered by the department, and it has been rejected. Under the circumstances, the irresistible conclusion could be that the petitioner is not entitled for the relief, and the writ petition requires an order of dismissal. Accordingly, it is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected WPMP is also dismissed.