Allowed

Pokkaran .N.K v. The District Collector / Inspector of Panchayat

Madras HC11 Nov 2022WP(MD)/6158/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court quashed the rejection order of an ex-service man applying for the post of Village Panchayat Secretary. The Court held that as the post is reserved for ex-servicemen, the recruitment authority must consider the petitioner from the adjoining village panchayat within the same block if no suitable resident candidate is available.

What did the court decide?

The impugned rejection order dated 20.11.2021 is quashed. The respondents are directed to consider the petitioner's eligibility and take a call on the appointment within eight weeks.

Pokkaran .N.K Vs The District Collector / Inspector of… — Specific Performance | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.6158 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 11.11.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.6158 of 2022 and W.M.P.(MD)No.4775 of 2022

N.K.Pokkaran

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector / Inspector of Panchayat, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

¶11

2.The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayat) Nainar Kovil Union Office, Ramanathapuram District.

¶12

3.The President, Kulathur Village Panchayat, Nainar Kovil Union, Ramanthapuram District. ... Respondents

¶13

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the impugned rejection order in Na.Ka.Thi3/2759/2019 dated 20.11.2021 issued by the 2nd respondent and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary exercise of power and consequently direct the respondents to issue appointment order to the petitioner for the post of Village Panchayat Secretary (Meant for ex-service man), Kulathur Village Panchayat, Ramanathapuram District forthwith.

¶14

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶15

1/6

¶16

W.P(MD)No.6158 of 2022

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Gowrishankar For Respondents : Mr.A.K.Manikkam Special Government Pleader

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

¶20

The petitioner is an ex-service man. The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayat), Nainar Kovil Union Office, Ramanathapuram District issued notification dated 08.11.2019 calling for applications from eligible candidates for filling up the post of Panchayat Secretary for Kulathur Village Panchayat, Ramanathapuram District. The petitioner was one of the applicants. The petitioner's application was rejected on the ground that he is not residing within the Kulathur Village. The rejection order dated 20.11.2021 is put to challenge in this writ petition.

¶21

The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submits that the impugned order came to be passed in view of the interim stay granted in respect of G.O.Ms.No.72, Rural Development & Panchayat Raj(E5) Department, dated 09.07.2013, I am not able to appreciate this objection. This is for more than one reason. The impugned rejection order does not say so.

¶22

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶23

2/6

¶24

W.P(MD)No.6158 of 2022

¶25

Secondly, the interim order in respect of the aforesaid G.O was issued way back in the year 2013. The impugned recruitment notification was issued on 08.11.2019. Hence, this contention does not appeal to me. The impugned order refers to G.O.Ms.No.72, Rural Development & Panchayat Raj(E5) Department, dated 09.07.2013 for disqualifying the petitioner. My attention is drawn to Rule (5)(2) of the aforesaid G.O. It reads as under:-

¶26

5(2) Other Qualifications:- (i) No person shall be eligible for appointment to the post, if he/she has not passed S.S.L.C issued under the authority of the Government of Tamil Nadu or any other equivalent examination prescribed by the Government to be equivalent thereto;

¶27

(ii) No person shall be eligible for appointment to the post unless he/she is a resident of the Village Panchayat concerned.

¶28

(iii) If no qualified and suitable candidate residing in the Village Panchayat concerned is available for selection for appointment to the post, eligible candidate from the adjoining Village Panchayats within the block shall be appointed.

¶29

If a qualified and suitable candidate is not available in the village in question, then, it is open to the recruiting authority to select a candidate from the adjoining village panchayat but which must be within the same block. The petitioner fulfils the said condition. Even as per the earlier G.O., the very same position obtained. Therefore, the second respondent erred in rejecting the case of the petitioner on the sole ground that he was residing at a distance of 25 kilometers away from Kulathur Village. The impugned rejection order is set https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/6

¶30

W.P(MD)No.6158 of 2022

¶31

aside. However, I cannot straight away direct the respondents to issue appointment order to the petitioner for the post of Village Panchayat Secretary. There is no dispute that the post has been reserved for ex-service man. If no suitable or eligible candidate is available in the village in question, the petitioner will have to be considered. He cannot be treated as disqualified. The respondents are directed to take a call in the matter within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶32

The Writ Petition is allowed on these terms. No costs. Consequently,

¶33

connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶34

11.11.2022

¶35

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No rmi

¶36

¶37

1.The District Collector / Inspector of Panchayat, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.

¶38

2.The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayat) Nainar Kovil Union Office, Ramanathapuram District.

¶39

3.The President,

¶40

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶41

4/6

¶42

W.P(MD)No.6158 of 2022

¶43

Kulathur Village Panchayat, Nainar Kovil Union, Ramanthapuram District.

¶44

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

¶45

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/6

¶46

W.P(MD)No.6158 of 2022

¶47

rmi

¶48

W.P(MD)No.6158 of 2022

¶49

11.11.2022

¶50

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/6

Pokkaran .N.K v. The District Collector / Inspector of Panchayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pokkaran .N.K v. The District Collector / Inspector of Panchayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kalidass Vs The Director General of Police

R.Chandrasekaran, Vs the Secretary to Government

Ramapiran .a Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Ramakodi.T.S. Vs the Commissioner

Jeba Paul D (Registration No. 0401401) Vs the State of Tamilnadu

Emmanuvel.a Vs The Director