1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 9/3/2011 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K.VENKATARAMAN W.P.(MD) No.2618 and 2699 of 2011 R. Pushpavalli ... Petitioner in both the W.Ps Vs 1. The District Collector Theni District Theni 625 531. 2. The Commissioner/Block Development Officer Uthamapalayam Panchayat Union Theni District. ... Respondents in both the W.Ps. Prayer in W.P.(MD)No.2618 of 2011:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents herein to permit the petitioner to join duty in the post of noon meal organizer at Govt. Kallar Primary School, Ko.Duraisamypuram, Uthamapalayam Panchayat Union, Theni District as per the order of the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.52429/2009 12 dated 26/2/2011. Prayer in W.P.(MD)No.2699 of 2011:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus in calling for the records of the first respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.52429/2009 12 dated 28/2/2011 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents herein to permit the petitioner to join duty in the post of noon meal organizer at Govt. Kallar Primary School, Ko.Duraisamypuram, Uthamapalayam Panchayat Union, Theni District as per the order of the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.52429/2009 12 dated 26/2/2011. For petitioner ... Mr.A.K.Manickam For respondents ... Mr.V.Rajasekaran, Spl.G.P. COMMON ORDER Mr.V.Rajasekaran, Special Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the respondents. 2. By consent, the main writ petitions itself are taken up for final disposal. 3. The petitioner has filed the writ petition in W.P.(MD) No.2699 of 2011, challenging the order of the first respondent dated 28/2/2011 an order of cancellation of the appointment of the petitioner and also consequently directing the respondent herein to permit the petitioner to join duty in the post of Noon Meal Organizer at Govt. Kallar Primary School, Ko.Duraisamypuram, Uthamapalayam Panchayat Union, Theni District as per the order of the first respondent dated 26/2/2011. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 4. The case of the petitioner in a nutshell is stated here under:- The petitioner belong to weaker Community of the Society. On 29/1/2011, the first respondent herein has issued a paper publication to fill up the vacancies in the Noon Meal Centers at Theni District. The petitioner applied for the said post. She was directed to attend an interview to be held on 25/2/2011. 5. Having satisfied with the qualification, she was issued with an appointment order dated 26/2/2011. By the said order, she was appointed in the Noon Meal Center at Govt. Kallar Primary School, Ko.Duraisamypuram, Uthamapalayam Panchayat Union, Theni District. She was directed to report before the second respondent immediately along with original records. On the same day, she appeared before the second respondent to join duty. While so, the second respondent, after seeing the appointment order, directed her to wait in the Office. Till the evening, no orders were issued permitting her to join duty. Therefore, the petitioner sent a detailed representation to the second respondent directing the second respondent to permit her to join duty. 6. Thereafter, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the writ petition in W.P.No.2618 of 2011 for a mandamus directing the respondents to permit her to join duty in the post of Noon Meal Organiser, referred to above. On 4/3/2011, the matter was listed for admission and it was passed over to verify the reasons for not permitting the petitioner to join duty. At 2.15 p.m., when the matter again was taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate produced a fax copy of the impugned order dated 28/2/2011, cancelling her appointment without notice. Hence the petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the order of cancelling her appointment. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner mainly contended that when the petitioner was appointed, the same cannot be cancelled without due notice to her. However, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner belong to Scheduled Caste Community and the post is meant for Backward Community. Mistakenly, the petitioner was appointed to the said post. Finding the mistake, the same was cancelled. Nothing can be found faulted in the said order. 8. I have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.V.Rajasekaran, Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 9. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was appointed as Noon Meal Organizer at Govt. Kallar Primary School, Ko.Duraisamypuram, Uthamapalayam Panchayat Union, Theni District. She has contacted the second respondent to join duty, however, she was not permitted to join duty Later, the impugned order came to be passed, which is under challenge. By the impugned order dated 28/2/2011, the appointment that has been granted to the petitioner was cancelled. The reason that has been assigned in the impugned order is that on administrative ground, the appointment was cancelled. Cancelling the appointment order on administrative ground is unknown to law. However, the learned Special Government Pleader today submitted that the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste and the post is https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 meant only for Backward Community. Mistakenly, the petitioner was appointed in the said post and hence, the same was cancelled. Even assuming the said reason is a sound reason to cancel the order of appointment, it does not find place in the impugned order. As stated already, the impugned order states that on administrative ground, the order of appointment given to the petitioner was cancelled. That apart, even assuming the appointment granted to the petitioner could be cancelled, the same can be done only after giving due notice to the petitioner. 10. In view of the above stated reasons, I am inclined to set aside the impugned order of the first respondent dated 28/2/2011 Accordingly, (i). The writ petition in W.P.(MD) No.2699 of 2011 stands allowed. (ii). It is open for the first respondent to pass orders afresh, after giving due notice to the petitioner and after hearing the petitioner. (iii). Since the impugned order of the first respondent is set aside, there could be no impediment for the petitioner to join duty and the respondents are directed to permit her to join duty till the orders are passed afresh in one way or the other. (iv). No costs. (v). Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. W.P.(MD) No.2618 of 2011:- In view of the orders passed in W.P (MD) No.2699 of 2011, this writ petition has become infructuous and the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is also dismissed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The District Collector,Theni District,Theni 625 531. 2. The Commissioner/Block Development Officer Uthamapalayam Panchayat Union,Theni District. +1cc to Mr.A.K.Manickam, Advocate SR.No.5519 +2ccs to The Special Govt.Pleader SR.Nos.5768 & 5767 W.P.(MD) Nos.2618 and 2699 of 2011 9/3/2011 mvs PA/25.03.2011/3P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/