Madras High Court
The District Collector vs Uma on 11 June, 2025
Author: G.R.Swaminathan
Bench: G.R.Swaminathan
W.A.(MD)No.1408 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 11.06.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR
W.A.(MD)No.1408 of 2025
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.8407 of 2025
1.The District Collector,
Collectorate,
Sivagangai District.
2.The Personal Assistant to Collector,
(Development), Collectorate,
Sivagangai District.
3.The Block Development Officer,
O/o the Block Development Officer,
Tiruppatur Taluk, Sivagangai District.
4.The Panchayat President,
Mahipalanpatti Village,
Tiruppathur Taluk, Sivagangai District. ... Appellants
Vs.
Uma ... Respondent
Prayer : Writ Appeal filed under Clause XV of Letters Patent, to allow the
writ appeal by setting aside the order passed in W.P.(MD)No.12751 of
2017 dated 21.08.2024 on the file of this Court.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 01:04:50 pm )
W.A.(MD)No.1408 of 2025
For Appellants : Mr.N.Satheeshkumar,
Addl. Government Pleader.
For Respondent : Mr.T.Aswin Raja
JUDGMENT
The district administration challenges the order dated 21.08.2024
allowing W.P.(MD)No.12751 of 2017 filed by the respondent herein.
2.The respondent herein was appointed as Panchayat Secretary on
03.05.2000. She was terminated from service on 15.06.2017 on the
ground that she did not possess the requisite educational qualification for
holding the post of Panchayat Secretary when she was initially
appointed. It is not in dispute that the respondent herein / writ petitioner
subsequently acquired the requisite educational qualification that is
SSLC in the year 2009.
3.The learned Single Judge took note of the fact that for 17 long
years, the writ petitioner was allowed to continue in service. Secondly,
the writ petitioner was not at fault. She did not make any
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 01:04:50 pm )
misrepresentation. It was the Panchayat President who had erred in
appointing the writ petitioner even though the writ petitioner did not
have the requisite qualification.
4.In a similar case, the Hon'ble Division Bench in
W.A.(MD)No.1111 of 2024 dated 08.07.2024 took an equitable view and
felt that non-possession of educational qualification at the time of
appointment can be condoned. Such a view was taken by taking into
account the long service put in by the appointee.
5.The same approach has been adopted in the present case. We are
of the view that the equitable approach adopted by the learned Single
Judge does not warrant interference. The writ appeal is dismissed. No
costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(G.R.S. J.,) & (K.R.S. J.,)
11.06.2025
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
ias
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 01:04:50 pm )
To:
1.The District Collector,
Collectorate,
Sivagangai District.
2.The Personal Assistant to Collector,
(Development), Collectorate,
Sivagangai District.
3.The Block Development Officer,
O/o the Block Development Officer,
Tiruppatur Taluk, Sivagangai District.
4.The Panchayat President,
Mahipalanpatti Village,
Tiruppathur Taluk,
Sivagangai District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 01:04:50 pm )
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 01:04:50 pm )
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
and
K.RAJASEKAR, J.
ias
11.06.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/06/2025 01:04:50 pm )
