BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATE: 28/09/2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI Writ Petition (MD) No.90 of 2010 and M.P.(MD) No.2 of 2010 Bharathi .. Petitioner Vs 1.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. 2.The District Project Officer, Child Welfare Office, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. 3.The Child Welfare Project Officer, Sivagangai Union, Sivagangai Taluk, Sivagangai District. 4.Nalayini .. Respondents Prayer Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the proceedings made in Se.Mu.Na.Ka.No.5555/ A1/2008 dated 21.11.2009 and quash the same and to direct the 1st respondent to appoint the petitioner as Anganvadi Assistant at Kothangulam Village, Sivagangai Union, Sivagangai District. !For Petitioner ... Mr.V.Kannan ^For Respondents 1 to 3 ... Mr.K.Balasubramanian Additional Government Pleader For 4th Respondent ... No Appearance * * * * * :ORDER
Admittedly, for the post of Anganvadi Assistant the conditions
required for appointment are that (i) the person should know read and write;
(ii) female alone are eligible to be appointed; (iii) the person must have
completed 25 years and not more than 40 years and (iv) preference should only be
given to local residents.
2. In the present writ petition, the petitioner, who has also
participated in the interview for Anganvadi Assistant along with the 4th
respondent, challenges the impugned order passed by the first respondent
District Collector dated 21.11.2009, by which the District Collector has
appointed the 4th respondent as Anganvadi Assistant.
3. It is not in dispute that both the petitioner and the 4th
respondent are local residents. While the petitioner was aged 34 years at the
time of appointment of the 4th respondent, the 4th respondent was aged 32 years.
The only ground on which the challenge is made is that the petitioner is old in
age and therefore, she should have been given preference. By a reading of the
G.O.Ms.No.203 Social Welfare Department dated 19.08.2005, which enables the
appointment of Anganvadi Assistant it is clear that there is no such stipulation
that the old age person should be given appointment but, it is stated that the
person to be eligible for appointment herself not be aged below 25 and not be
aged above 40 years.
4. The further case of the petitioner is that she has got Diploma in
Pre-Primary (Kindergarten) Teacher Training, which she has completed in the year
2007, which the 4th respondent does not possess. The said diploma is not
necessary for appointment as Anganvadi Assistant. In such view of the matter,
simply because the petitioner is more qualified, it cannot be a ground to set
aside the selection of the 4th respondent, when admittedly the 4th respondent is
also qualified for the said post. In the service matters, unless the G.O.
stipulates specifically that old age person should be given appointment, it is
not possible for this Court to give such a direction. There is no merit in the
Writ Petition.
5. Hence, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected M.P.(MD) No.2 of 2010 is dismissed.
sj
To
1.The District Collector,
Sivagangai District,
Sivagangai.
2.The District Project Officer,
Child Welfare Office,
Sivagangai District,
Sivagangai.
3.The Child Welfare Project Officer,
Sivagangai Union,
Sivagangai Taluk,
Sivagangai District.