This is a writ petition challenging the cancellation of the petitioner's appointment as Panchayat Secretary. The Court held that since the appointment violated age limits applicable in 2008, the lower authority acted within its power to cancel it, and the Court cannot interfere.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.No.21851 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 01.12.2023
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
W.P.No.21851 of 2013
K.Durairaj
.. Petitioner
vs
.. Respondents
Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the 1st respondent's impugned order in Na.Ka.No.4759/2011/Vi6 dated 10.07.2013 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner as Panchayat Secretary in the 3rd respondent Kadathur
Page 1 of 8
W.P.No.21851 of 2013
Village Panchayat in conformity with the Tamil Nadu Village Panchayat Secretaries (Conditions of Service) Rules, 2013 issued by the Principal Secretary to Government in G.O.(Ms) No.72 Rural Development & Panchayat Raj (E5) Department dated 09.07.2013 with consequential benefits.
For the Petitioner : Mr.M.Purushothaman
For the Respondents : Mrs.M.Geetha Thamaraiselvan Spl. Government Pleader
ORDER
This writ petition is filed challenging the impugned order dated 10.7.2013 whereby the District Collector, as Inspector of Panchayat, has cancelled the appointment of the petitioner as Panchayat Secretary of Kadathur Village Panchayat.
Kadathur Panchayat has passed a resolution appointing the petitioner as temporary Panchayat Secretary. Thereafter, the petitioner was appointed as regular Panchayat Secretary on 7.7.2008 and he was performing his duties to the satisfaction of all his superior officers. Subsequently, a complaint was raised about
___________ Page 2 of 8_
W.P.No.21851 of 2013
his employment and the Assistant Director of Panchayat was directed to inquire into the matter. Pursuant thereto, the enquiry was conducted. In the enquiry, the petitioner had also participated. However, the impugned order is passed cancelling his appointment.
Page 3 of 8
W.P.No.21851 of 2013
prescribed as upper age limit. Therefore, the petitioner contends that the impugned order of cancellation is liable to be set aside.
behalf of the petitioner, who reiterated the averments made in the
___________ Page 4 of 8_
W.P.No.21851 of 2013
writ petition as above and also Mrs.M.Geetha Thamaraiselvan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents, who reiterated the submissions made in the counteraffidavit as above.
___________ Page 5 of 8_
W.P.No.21851 of 2013
appointment is made even without considering the eligibility criteria and the same is de hors the Rules, then the District Collector, as the Inspector of the Panchayat, has every right to inquire into the same and cancel the appointment, if it is illegal. Therefore, when the appointment of the petitioner was cancelled after giving due opportunity to the petitioner and exercising the power conferred on the District Collector, this Court cannot interfere in the matter.
There will be no order as to costs.
01.12.2023 Index : Yes Neutral Citation : No bbr
___________ Page 6 of 8_
W.P.No.21851 of 2013
To
Page 7 of 8
W.P.No.21851 of 2013
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY,J.
bbr
W.P.No.21851 of 2013
01.12.2023
___________ Page 8 of 8_
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can interfere with the cancellation of a statutory appointment made in violation of eligibility criteria applicable at the time of recruitment.
Whether the new Rules applicable from 2013 apply retrospectively to an appointment made in 2008.
Whether the cancellation of the petitioner's appointment, being de hors the Rules, is maintainable in a Writ Petition.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
K.Durairaj
The District Collector cum Inspector of Panchayats, Tiruppur
The Block Development Officer, Madathukulam Panchayat Union, Tiruppur District
The President, Kadathur Village Panchayat
D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
