Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 33 (MAD)

C. Anbusamy v. Government of Tamil Nadu

2014-01-06

M.VENUGOPAL

body2014
JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner has filed the present Writ of Mandamus, praying for issuance of an order in directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Night Watchman, in terms of his representation dated 03.12.2012. 2. According to the petitioner, he has studied upto 5th standard in Elementary School of Velagoundanvalasu. He belongs to Schedule Caste community. He registered his name in the employment exchange on 22.5.2006 and his employment registration number is 2006MO1702. At the time of filing of the present writ petition, his age was 39 years and 7 months and his wife is a physically challenged person. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the first respondent, Government of Tamil Nadu issued G.O.Ms.No.47 dated 2.3.2012 consequent to the statement made by the Hon'ble Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu in the legislative assembly, for appointment of 5000 post of non-teaching staffs. As per the G.O., the first respondent decided to appoint Night Watchman and scavengers in Government Schools. He received a letter from the Employment Exchange for the post of Night Watchman for the interview to be held on 11.6.2012. He attended the interview and produced all the relevant documents, however, he was not selected. On other hand, his juniors were selected. The selection list was published through internet on 19.11.2012. 4. It is the further case of the petitioner that as per the order of the Government, appointment orders were issued and the persons selected have to join duty within 7 days from the date of the appointment order, which expired on 30.11.2012. He was informed that 11 persons selected for Tiruppur District did not join duty and the posts are still vacant and the respondents have been taking steps to fill up the vacancies at the end of December 2012. As such, the petitioner has been requesting the respondents 2 and 3 in person to appoint him in the vacant post and thereafter, sent a representation dated 3.12.2012 to the respondents, making a request to select him for the existing vacancy. However, his representation has not been met with any positive response. 5. Inasmuch as the relief sought for by the petitioner in his representation dated 3.12.2012 is only limited in nature viz., to appoint him as Night Watchman, this Court is of the view that a direction cannot be straight away issued to the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Night Watchman. 5. Inasmuch as the relief sought for by the petitioner in his representation dated 3.12.2012 is only limited in nature viz., to appoint him as Night Watchman, this Court is of the view that a direction cannot be straight away issued to the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Night Watchman. However, this Court is well within its power in directing the third respondent District Educational Officer, Tiruppur to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 3.12.2012 in a threadbare passion and to dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. In this regard, this Court permits the petitioner to submit his copy of representation dated 3.12.2012 to the respondents within two weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. 6. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.