Madras High Court
P.Thilagam vs The District Collector on 2 February, 2021
W.A(MD)No.650 of 2012
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 02.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.KANNAMMAL
W.A(MD)No.650 of 2012
and
M.P(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2012
P.Thilagam ... Appellant/Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector,
Virudhunagar District,
Virudhunagar.
2.The Project Officer(ICDS),
District Project Office,
Anganvadi Centers,
Near Railway Over Bridge,
Virudhunagar – Aruppukkottai Road,
Virudhunagar,
Virudhunagar District.
3.The Child Development Project Officer,
Child Development Project Office,
Sevalpatti,
Kariyapatti Taluk,
Virudhunagar District. ... Respondents/Respondents
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against
the order dated 03.08.2012 passed in W.P(MD)No.10886 of 2012.
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 1/5
W.A(MD)No.650 of 2012
For Appellant : Mr.R.Murugappan
For Respondents : Mr.M.Murugan,
Government Advocate
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA,J.)
The writ appeal is directed against the order dated 03.08.2012
passed in W.P(MD)No.10886 of 2012.
2. The unsuccessful writ petitioner is the appellant herein. The
appellant had applied for the Post of 'Anganvadi Worker', which was
called for in G.O.Ms.No.72 Social Welfare and Nutritious Meal Programme
Department, dated 30.04.2012.
3. As per the said G.O., the applicant should have completed 25
years and not completed 35 years as on 01.05.2012. The writ appellant
was born on 07.03.1977 and she had applied for the Post of 'Anganvadi
Worker' and she was also appointed on 27.06.2012. Later, it was
verified and found that she was over aged on the date of appointment.
Hence, relieving order was issued on 07.06.2012, which is under
challenge.
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 2/5
W.A(MD)No.650 of 2012
4. No doubt, there is a clause in the above said Government Order,
which gives five years extension, which is applicable only to destitutes
and widows and that is not applicable to the writ appellant. According to
the writ appellant, it is only a mistake by the Certificate Verifying
Authorities, who had selected the appellant as a successful candidate
and thereafter, within a month, the said mistake was found out and
based on which, she was terminated from service. Therefore, there is no
infirmity in the order passed by the authority as has been confirmed by
the learned Single Judge. The writ appellant is unable to demonstrate as
to how she is eligible for appointment and is unable to convince this
Court on any other ground, also to sustain the appointment.
5. In view of the above, there is no reason to interfere with the
order of the learned Single Judge, the same is confirmed and the writ
appeal is dismissed. No Costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous
Petitions are closed.
[P.S.N.,J] [S.K.,J.]
02.02.2021
Index :Yes/No
Internet :Yes/No
pm
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 3/5
W.A(MD)No.650 of 2012
Note :
In view of the present lock
down owing to COVID-19
pandemic, a web copy of the
order may be utilized for official
purposes, but, ensuring that the
copy of the order that is
presented is the correct copy,
shall be the responsibility of the
advocate / litigant concerned.
To:
1.The District Collector,
Virudhunagar District,
Virudhunagar.
2.The Project Officer(ICDS),
District Project Office,
Anganvadi Centers,
Near Railway Over Bridge,
Virudhunagar – Aruppukkottai Road,
Virudhunagar,
Virudhunagar District.
3.The Child Development Project Officer,
Child Development Project Office,
Sevalpatti,
Kariyapatti Taluk,
Virudhunagar District.
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 4/5
W.A(MD)No.650 of 2012
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA,J.
and
S.KANNAMMAL,J.
pm
W.A(MD)No.650 of 2012
02.02.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
Page 5/5
