1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:14/06/2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K.VENKATARAMAN Writ Petition (MD) No.2687 of 2011 Sudha Devi :Petitioner -Vs- 1.The District Collector, Trichy District. 2.The District Development Officer, Trichy District, Child Development Scheme Office, No.13 North Street, Mannapuram, Trichy-20 3.The Child Development Scheme Officer, Lalgudi Panchayat Union, VOC Nagar, Anagarai Village & Post, Lalgudi Taluk, Trichy District. 4.R.Parimala W/o.Chandrasekaran North Harijan Street, Thinniyam, Lalgudi, Trichy District. :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 the impugned appointment order issued by the first respondent to the fourth respondent in Se.Mu.Aa.A139/A1/10 dated 28.10.2010 and quash the same and appoint the petitioner as Assistant in the Trichy District, Lalgudi Taluk, Mettupatti Kuruchi Mini Child Development Centre. For petitioner :Mr.M.R.Sreenivasan For Respondents :Mr.S.Chandrasekar For RR1 & RR2 Government Advocate For RR3 Mr.K.M.Vijayakumar ORDER Challenging the appointment of the fourth respondent as Anganwadi Worker, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition. 2.The only ground, which was taken primarily and argued by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, is that the petitioner hails from the same village for which the post of Anganwadi worker was filled up, but, whereas the fourth respondent hails from the neighbour village. Hence, according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the petitioner should have been preferred over the fourth respondent. That apart, it has been contended that the petitioner is having previous experience, whereas the fourth respondent is not having previous experience. 3.On the other hand, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 contended that the fourth respondent is residing within 2 kms from the Centre. That apart, it has been found that the fourth respondent belongs to Scheduled Caste community and got three daughters. Considering https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 the qualification of the fourth respondent, she has been appointed to the said post, which cannot be faulted. 4.The learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent contended that on subjective satisfaction, the authorities found that the fourth respondent is fit enough to be selected for the post of Anganwadi Worker and hence she has been appointed and there is no infirmity in the said order. 5.As rightly pointed out by the learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 to 3, the fourth respondent seems to be residing within 2 kms from the Centre. That apart, it has been found by the selection committee consisting of the District Programme Officer, Trichy, Child Development Project Officer, Lalgudi, Block Development Officer, Lalgudi and the Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Puthur Uthamanur, that the fourth respondent is qualified to be appointed to the post of Anganwadi Worker. The subjective satisfaction arrived at by the said selection committee cannot be interfered by this Court, except if it is contended that there exists arbitrariness in coming to such conclusion or there exists a colourable exercise of power. The petitioner has not pleaded so. The only contention that has been raised by the petitioner is that the petitioner resides in the same village for which the said post was filled up, whereas the fourth respondent belonged to other village. As already pointed out in the counter affidavit of the second respondent, the fourth respondent is residing within 2 kms from the Centre and the other points have been found in favour of the fourth respondent by the selection committee and as such no infirmity has been pointed out by the petitioner. 6.In view of the above, I am not inclined to interfere with the order appointing the fourth respondent as Anganwadi Worker. In fine, the Writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) / TRUE COPY / Sub Assistant Registrar To: 1.The District Collector, Trichy District. 2.The District Development Officer, Trichy District, Child Development Scheme Office, No.13 North Street, Mannapuram, Trichy-20 3.The Child Development Scheme Officer, Lalgudi Panchayat Union, VOC Nagar, Anagarai Village & Post,Lalgudi Taluk,Trichy District. +1CC to Mr.M.R.Sreenivasan, Advocate. SR.No.18593. +1CC to Mr.K.M.Vijayakumar, Advocate. SR.No.18248. +1CC to The Special Government Pleader. SR.No.18807. RR WP(MD)No.2687 of 2011 and MP.No.1 of 2011 RP/22.06.2011/2P/7C. 14.06.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/