The Madras High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the appointment of another person as a Noon Meal Organiser instead of the petitioner. The court held that the appointment followed a valid interview process and the District Collector's conclusion was based on objective criteria.
The writ petition was dismissed.
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.(MD).No.15191 of 2016
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 15.11.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN
W.P.(MD).No.15191 of 2016 and W.M.P.(MD).No.11196 of 2016
T.Pushpavalli .. Petitioner
Vs. 1.The District Collector, Trichirappalli District, Trichirappalli.
3.The Correspondent, CSI Primary School, Woraiyur, Trichirappalli.
4.R.Parameswari .. Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the impugned order of the 1st respondent dated 22.02.2016 made in RCN.
Page 1 of 6
W.P.(MD).No.15191 of 2016
6/231/15 and quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to appoint the petitioner for the post of Noon Meal Organiser in the 3rd respondent school.
ORDER
The Writ Petition relates to appointment of Noon Meal Organiser.
temporary basis. Taking note of the fact that a vacancy has arisen, the respondents 1 and 2 had addressed a letter to the institution to forward the list of names. The second respondent, the Commissioner, Anthanallur Panchayat Union Office, Trichy forwarded a list of ten names to the third respondent with a request to select any one of them from the same. The third respondent School sent a letter to the second respondent on 28.01.2016, requesting for appointment of the writ petitioner as a Noon Meal Organiser. On 09.02.2016, the interview was conducted and the
Page 2 of 6
W.P.(MD).No.15191 of 2016
official respondents came to a conclusion that the fourth respondent is competent to be appointed as Noon Meal Organiser. Challenging the same, the present Writ Petition has been filed.
W.P.(MD).No.15191 of 2016
28.01.2016 and another dated 23.02.2016. In both the letters, the third respondent had recommended that one T.Pushpavalli, the writ petitioner, who had already been working as Noon Meal Organiser, should be continued in the said post. However, the District Collector had applied G.O.Ms.No.163, Social Welfare and Nutritious Meal Programme (SW2) Department dated 18.08.2010 and assessed the performance, age and other criteria and came to the conclusion that the fourth respondent is better suited for appointment than the writ petitioner.
Page 4 of 6
W.P.(MD).No.15191 of 2016
the impugned order. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition stands closed.
15.11.2023
NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Lm
To
The District Collector, Trichirappalli District, Trichirappalli.
Page 5 of 6
W.P.(MD).No.15191 of 2016
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN,J.
Lm
W.P.(MD).No.15191 of 2016
15.11.2023
Page 6 of 6
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned order appointing a different person as Noon Meal Organiser despite the school's recommendation should be interfered with?
Whether the appointment was made without considering the petitioner's recommendation and the subsequent interview process?
Whether the District Collector's subjective satisfaction based on objective criteria justifies the appointment of another candidate?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
W.P.(MD).No.14578 of 2016Referred¶5
T. Pushpavalli
The District Collector, Trichirappalli District
The Commissioner, Anthanallur Panchayat Union
The Correspondent, CSI Primary School, Woraiyur
R. Parameswari
V. Lakshminarayanan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
