1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.11.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU W.P.(MD)No.3579 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2011 B.Mariswari ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai. 2.The Project Officer, Integrated Child Development & Welfare Scheme, Melamadai, Madurai. 3.The Child Development & Welfare Officer, T.Kallupatti, Madurai District. 4.P.Anandavalli ... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 1st respondent herein in his proceedings in Se.Mu.Na.Ka.No.1821/A1/2010 dated 07.02.2011 and quash the same and consequently, direct the 1st respondent herein to appoint the petitioner herein as Anganwadi Helper in Peraiyur – III, Madurai District. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Hemakarthikeyan For Respondents : Mr.K.Mahesh Raja G.A. For R1 to R3 O R D E R The petitioner was an applicant for the post of Anganwadi Helper in the Peraiyur-III, Madurai since she was not selected after getting details under the Right to Information Act, she has filed the present Writ petition. 2. The major contention of the petitioner was that as she was a widow candidate before the selection committee she is entitled for the said post. 3. Notice regarding admission was granted in the Writ petition on 25.03.2011. The 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit dated 18.04.2011. 4. In the counter affidavit with reference to the claim of priority in paragraph 8 it was averred as follows: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 "8. I submit that totally 4 candidates called for interview and only 3 of them attended interview, one candidate is from 2 kms away place Peraiyur – 3 center. During interview, selection committee insisted for widow certificate from the authority. Even during interview committee she produced only death certificate of her husband. The petitioner produced only Family Card as proof of nativity, but not voter's identify card. Since Family Card had not yet been updated i.e., her husband's name had not been deleted from card, Selection Committee required alternative proof. Apart from that, her performance in the interview for general was not satisfactory. If the petitioner produced widow certificate she would be the only competent for the appointment. Her husband died on 23.03.2006 itself, by the time of interview she would have obtained the widow certificate. Even after applying for this post she would have obtained and produced during interview. Further, the petitioner stated before the interview committee that she is doing in Match works and earning considerably." 5. In the light of the stand taken by the respondent, the respondent cannot be found fault with for non selecting the petitioner. The petitioner of her challenge for not producing appropriate certificate despite an opportunity was given by the committee, even though the learned counsel for the petitioner now attempts to produce such a certificate that will note cure the earlier defect pointed out by the committee. 6. Under such circumstances, there is no case made out. Hence, the Writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P.is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (RTI) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai. 2. The Project Officer, Integrated Child Development & Welfare Scheme, Melamadai, Madurai. 3. The Child Development & Welfare Officer, T.Kallupatti, Madurai District. +1 CC to M/s.Hema Karthikeyan, Advocate (SR.No.38029) +1 CC to Special Government Pleader (SR.No.38414) W.P.(MD)No.3579 of 2011 03.11.2011 nbj NSV/21.11.11/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/