ORDER : 1. The prayer sought for in this writ petition is for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 19.02.2018. 2. Heard Mr. V. Singan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mrs. S. Srimathy, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent No.1 and Mr. V. Anand, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent No.2. Since no adverse order is going to be passed against the third respondent, notice to the third respondent is dispensed with. 3. It is claimed by the petitioner that, the petitioner is a destitute and deserted woman and living separately from the Society and of her husband, who has chosen to desert her permanently. The petitioner is presently residing with her parents at Velappudaiyanpatti in Manikandam Union, Srirangam Taluk, Trichy District. Her father is a poor agriculturist and her living with her parent is an additional burden to them. The petitioner further claimed that, she had originally applied in the year 2017 for the post of Assistant to the Cook to the second respondent, pursuant to which, though an interview was conducted, the petitioner was not selected, despite possessing the necessary qualification for consideration for the post of Assistant to Cook for Mid-day Meal programme. Therefore, it was necessitated to make a fresh application on 19.02.2018 on the part of the petitioner. Since the petitioner is running now 39 years of age and the upper age limit, as prescribed, for Government job is 40 years and the petitioner will be shortly completing the said upper age limit, her latest request dated 19.02.2018 made to the Hon'ble Minister concerned and the 1st respondent seeking appointment for Noon Meal Organizer can be directed to be considered. 4. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents. 5. I have gone through the said representation given by the petitioner dated 19.02.2018, which reads thus: xxx xxx xxx 6. 4. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents. 5. I have gone through the said representation given by the petitioner dated 19.02.2018, which reads thus: xxx xxx xxx 6. On going through the said averments made in the said representation of the petitioner dated 19.02.2018, this Court is of the view that, the said representation cannot be directed to be considered for two reasons: (i) since the said representation has been given to the Hon'ble Minister concerned of Government of Tamil Nadu, mandamus cannot issued as sought for; and (ii) the qualification projected by the petitioner in the said representation is that, the petitioner's father joined in a political party in the year 1972 and all the members of the petitioner's family are the members of the said political party. 7. By projecting the said merits, since the petitioner has requested the Hon'ble Minister concerned to consider her candidature for appointment to the post of Noon Meal Organizer, the said application cannot be directed to be considered and in the considered view of this Court, the said application, in fact, shall be out-rightly rejected. 8. The principles of democracy as a ruling pattern of society is a priceless gift to the mankind. In this regard, India, at the earliest, i.e., from the day of becoming republic, has adopted the democratic form of Governance, which has been envisaged in the preamble of the Constitution itself. 9. Indians are also familiar with the multi-party political system. Therefore, everyone, who wants to participate in the democratic process either directly or indirectly, may have allegiance with some political party. However, becoming a member or being a member of a political party can no longer be a qualification or even an additional or influential factor for consideration for appointment in public employment. 10. When that being the position, even though the appointment, which is sought for by the petitioner, is one of the lower level post in the State Government i.e. Organizer in Noon Meal Centre, one cannot claim that, his/her candidature shall be considered by the authorities concerned by taking into account that the applicant/members of the applicant family belong to a particular political party. 11. 11. This kind of trend has developed because, political influence is being instilled, at times, when selection or recruitment process is taken place in public employment. That is the reason why, a litigant public has approached this Court for such kind of prayer seeking for a mandamus. This Court is afraid that, if this kind of petitions are entertained, there will be a total chaos and disarray in the method to be adopted in making selection and appointment in public employment. This kind of practices should be curtailed at the threshold and even an iota of encouragement would lead to a bad, unpleasant, faulty and unhealthy precedent. Therefore, this Court, with heavy heart, by making the above observation, is inclined to appeal that, the stakeholders of the democratic system in this great Country must cherish the ideals and value the avoved principles of our forefathers, who built this Country by rendering selfless, untired and yeomen service in all these decades and should discourage this kind of political patronage at any cost. 12. With the above observation, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs.