1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29/06/2011 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K.VENKATARAMAN Writ Petition (MD) No.3043 of 2011 Muthulakshmi ... Petitioner Vs 1.The District Collector, Madurai District,Madurai. 2.The Child Welfare Officer, Integrated Child Welfare Scheme Melamadai, Madurai. 3.K.Vanitha W/o.Sekar, 3/137 Subramaniapuram Varichiyur, Madurai North Taluk Madurai. ...Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to order passed by the first respondent by his proceedings in Se.Mu.Na.Ka.No.1821/A1/2010 dated 07.02.2011 and quash the same and directing the first respondent to issue appointment order appointing the petitioner as Anganwadi Employee at Thatchanendal Village, Madurai North Taluk, Madurai District. For petitioner ...Mr.G.Karnan For Respondents ...Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen Addl. Government Pleader O R D E R Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final hearing. 3. Challenging the non-selection of the petitioner and selection of the third respondent for the post of Anganwadi employee, the present writ petition is laid. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that she has applied for the post of Anganwadi Employee in and around Madurai District. For the vacancy arose at Thatchanendal village, at the time of making application, she has enclosed all the particulars required by the respondents 1 and 2. After verifying the application and also after scrutinising the document produced by her, the second respondent communicated the proceeding, dated 04.10.2010, asking her to attend the interview. She attended the interview on 14.10.2010. At that time, she has produced all the relevant certificates. Despite the same, she has not been selected to the post. Though, she possessed all required qualification, the third respondent has been preferred over the petitioner for no reason whatsoever. Hence, the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition for the relief stated earlier. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 4. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents, wherein, it is stated that though the petitioner has produced all the relevant certificates, she has not produced the residence certificate showing the name of her husband. However, it is admitted that the petitioner fulfilled all the criteria, namely, age, education and community. She has produced only a Voter identity card, which bares the address of her father. Hence, she has not been selected. 5. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, this Court directed the respondents to produce the files pertaining to the appointment made for the post of Anganwadi Worker, which is the subject matter in this writ petition. The files produced would disclose that the petitioner has produced the residence certificate. 6. In view of the above stated position, I am of the considered view that the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent stating that the petitioner has not produced the residence certificate is totally an incorrect statement. As stated in the counter affidavit, the petitioner possesses all other requirements and her case was not considered only on the reasoning that she has not produced the residence certificate. The third respondent, who has been served, do not chose to appear before this Court and her name appears in the cause list, nevertheless, she has not appeared in person or through any counsel. 7. Considering the discussions made above, I am of the considered view that the impugned order dated 07.02.2011 of the first respondent appointing the third respondent as Anganwadi Worker at Thatchanendal village is liable to be set aside and accordingly set aside. The writ petition stands allowed. It is needless to say that the respondents have to consider the claim of the petitioner for the said post. 8. The said exercise has to be carried out within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar RR To 1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai. 2.The Child Welfare Officer, Integrated Child Welfare Scheme Melamadai, Madurai. +1cc to Special Government Pleader, SR.NO.20865 GH : 13.07.2011 : 2p/4c W.P.(MD) No.3043 of 2011 and M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/