Disposed¶49

A.Rani, v. the Secretary to Government

Madras HC7 Mar 2025WP/24352/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Employment exchange sponsorship seniority; District Employment Officer Krishnagiri; nomination as co-operative clerk; juniors sponsored; unfair discrimination; violation of rights; RTI Act 2005 enquiry; relaxation of rules; notional appointment with consequential benefits; six-month compliance direction; Article 226 writ petition; Madras High Court; W.P.No.24352 of 2013; A. Rani; Ve.vu.Nee1/812/2013; 22.04.2013 proceedings quashed/sought; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition disposed of with directions: Respondents to suitably accommodate the Petitioner taking note of her age and qualifications, obtaining Government relaxation if required, completing the exercise within six months of receipt of the order; no costs awarded. ¶49

A.Rani, Vs the Secretary to Government — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶49

Issue for consideration

Whether the 2nd Respondent (District Employment Officer, Krishnagiri) violated the Petitioner's rights and unfairly discriminated against her by sponsoring persons junior to her in employment-registration seniority for appointment as clerk in co-operative societies. +1 more

¶43

Court's answer

Persons junior to the Petitioner in employment-registration seniority were also sponsored by the 2nd Respondent; consequently there is a violation of the Petitioner's rights and unfair discrimination against her.

¶43

Ratio / Principle

The Respondents are directed to suitably accommodate the Petitioner, taking note of her age and qualifications, and if required to obtain suitable relaxation from the Government for appointing her.

¶44

Key takeaways

The accommodation exercise directed above shall be completed by the Respondents within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶48

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Hon'ble Mr. Justice C. Saravanan), by order dated 07.03.2025, disposed of W.P.No.24352 of 2013 filed by A. Rani under Article 226 seeking certiorarified mandamus to quash the proceedings of the District Employment Officer, Krishnagiri dated 22.04.2013 (Ve.vu.Nee1/812/2013) refusing to sponsor her name for nomination as clerk in co-operative societies. The Petitioner had registered with the employment exchange on 01.07.1991, 16.06.1993, 30.12.1997 and 18.11.1999 (after her Diploma in Co-operation). The counter affidavit stated that only candidates registered up to 29.10.1996 (MBC) and 27.08.1997 (OC) were considered, and the Government Advocate pleaded non-availability of vacancies. However, a communication from the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies dated 19.06.2013 enclosing a sponsorship list showed that persons junior to the Petitioner had been sponsored. Holding that this violated the Petitioner's rights and amounted to unfair discrimination, the Court directed the Respondents to suitably accommodate her, taking note of her age and qualifications, obtaining relaxation from the Government if required, within six months. No costs.

¶1

W.P.No.24352 of 2013

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 07.03.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

W.P.No.24352 of 2013

A.Rani

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Secretary to Government, Labour and Employment Department, Fort St.George,

¶11

Chennai – 600 009.

¶12

2.The District Employment Officer, Employment Office, Palayapettai, Krishnagiri – 635 001.

¶13

3.The Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Krishnagiri Region, C/o.L.D.Bank,

¶14

Co.operative colony, Krishnagiri – 635 001.

¶15

...Respondents

¶16

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the proceedings of the District Employment Officer, Krishnagiri the second Respondent herein made in Ve.vu.Nee1/812/2013 dated 1/8

¶17

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

¶18

W.P.No.24352 of 2013

¶19

22.04.2013 quash the same and direct the second Respondent herein to sponsor the name of the Petitioner to the third Respondent for eventual notional appointment to the post of clerk in any of the societies coming under his control if necessary by relaxing the rules if any in her favour from the date on which her junior in terms of employment registration was appointed with all consequential continuity of service and all attendant monetary benefits and disburse all the arrears within a short date that may be fixed by this court.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Rajkumar

¶21

For Respondents : Mr.M.Muthuswamy Government Advocate

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition to call for the records

¶24

relating to the Proceedings dated 22.04.2013 made in Ve.vu.Nee1/812/2013 by the 2^nd Respondent/the District Employment Officer, Krishnagiri and quash the same and to direct the 2^nd Respondent to sponsor the name of the Petitioner to the 3^rd Respondent for notional appointment to the post of clerk in any of the societies coming under the control of the 3^rd Respondent, if necessary by relaxing the rules if any in her favour from the date on which her junior was appointed in terms of

¶25

2/8

¶26

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

¶27

W.P.No.24352 of 2013

¶28

employment registration with all consequential continuity of service and all attendant monetary benefits and to disburse all the arrears.

¶29

The case of the Petitioner is that the 2^nd Respondent had sponsored candidates who had registered with the 2^nd Respondent much later to the Petitioner overlooking the seniority of the Petitioner. It is submitted that the Petitioner had initially registered with the 2^nd Respondent as early on 01.07.1991. Subsequently, the Petitioner completed +2 in the year 1993 and re-registered her name in the year 1993 on 16.06.1993 with the 2^nd Respondent.

¶30

It is the further case of the Petitioner that the Petitioner thereafter

¶31

completed B.A.History in the year 1997 and therefore registered her name again with the 2^nd Respondent on 30.12.1997. It is further submitted that the Petitioner had also completed Diploma in Co-operation in the year 1999 and thus registered on 18.11.1999.

¶32

It is therefore submitted by the Petitioner that in response to the Recruitment Notification issued by the 3^rd Respondent, the 2^nd Respondent

¶33

3/8

¶34

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

¶35

W.P.No.24352 of 2013

¶36

sponsored several other persons who had registered with the 2^nd Respondent after the Petitioner and thus the Petitioner's legitimate right to being considered for appointment to the post has been ignored by the 2^nd Respondent.

¶37

The learned counsel for the Petitioner further submits that there has been inordinate delay in sponsoring the name of the Petitioner by the 2^nd Respondent. It is further submitted that one similarly placed person, Mrs.Kalarani submitted a Representation to various cooperative societies in Krishnagiri District and also to the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Dharmapuri and Krishnagiri under RTI Act, 2005 on 11.04.2012 to find out as to how many juniors of the said Mrs.Kalarani and the Petitioner in terms of employment seniority maintained by the 2^nd Respondent have been sponsored for appointment to the post of Co-operative Clerk in the primary Co-operative Societies.

¶38

The learned Government Advocate for the Respondents has filed a Counter Affidavit without any categorical reply to the averments in the Affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition. All that have been stated in

¶39

4/8

¶40

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

¶41

W.P.No.24352 of 2013

¶42

the Counter Affidavit is that the name of the Petitioner is not sponsored for want of seniority because candidates registered upto 29.10.1996 under MBC category and upto 27.08.1997 under OC category were considered for nomination and that the Petitioner had registered her Diploma in Cooperation only on 18.11.1999. Hence, it is submitted that her name was not considered for nomination.

¶43

It is the submitted by the learned Government Advocate for the Respondents that there were no vacancies available and therefore the Petitioner's name was not considered. However, the communication filed by the Petitioner received from the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies dated 19.06.2013 enclosing a list of persons who have been sponsored indicates the persons who were junior to the Petitioner were also sponsored. Thus, there is a violation on the rights of the Petitioner and there has been an unfair discrimination against the Petitioner.

¶44

Under these circumstances, there shall be a direction to the Respondents to suitably accommodate the Petitioner, taking note of the age of the Petitioner and the qualification of the Petitioner, if required, suitable

¶45

5/8

¶46

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

¶47

W.P.No.24352 of 2013

¶48

relaxation may be obtained from the government for appointing the Petitioner. This exercise shall be completed by the Respondents within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶49

This Writ Petition stand disposed of with the above observations.

No costs.

07.03.2025

(½)

Neutral Citation : Yes/No

¶54

jas

¶55

¶56

1.The Secretary to Government, Labour and Employment Department, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶57

2.The District Employment Officer, Employment Office, Palayapettai,

¶58

6/8

¶59

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

¶60

W.P.No.24352 of 2013

¶61

Krishnagiri – 635 001.

¶62

3.The Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Krishnagiri Region, C/o.L.D.Bank, Co.operative colony, Krishnagiri – 635 001.

C.SARAVANAN, J.

jas

7/8

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

¶67

W.P.No.24352 of 2013

W.P.No.24352 of 2013

07.03.2025 (½)

8/8

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

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Proceedings made in Ve.vu.Nee1/812/2013 dated 22.04.2013 by the District Employment Officer, Krishnagiri (2nd Respondent) declining to sponsor/nominate the Petitioner's name for appointment to the post of clerk in co-operative societies, on the ground that she lacked seniority having registered her Diploma in Cooperation only on 18.11.1999.¶24
District Employment Officer, Krishnagiri (2nd Respondent) · 22.04.2013
Prior proceeding
Petitioner initially registered with the 2nd Respondent (employment exchange) on 01.07.1991.¶29
Prior proceeding
After completing +2 in 1993, the Petitioner re-registered on 16.06.1993 with the 2nd Respondent.¶29
Prior proceeding
After completing B.A. History in 1997, the Petitioner registered again on 30.12.1997.¶31
Prior proceeding
After completing Diploma in Co-operation in 1999, the Petitioner registered on 18.11.1999.¶31
Prior proceeding
In response to the 3rd Respondent's recruitment notification, the 2nd Respondent sponsored several persons who had registered after the Petitioner, ignoring her legitimate right to consideration.¶36
Prior proceeding
A similarly placed person, Mrs.Kalarani, filed an RTI representation on 11.04.2012 to ascertain how many juniors of herself and the Petitioner in employment seniority had been sponsored for appointment as Co-operative Clerk.¶37
Prior proceeding
Counter Affidavit of the Respondents: candidates registered up to 29.10.1996 (MBC category) and up to 27.08.1997 (OC category) alone were considered for nomination; the Petitioner's Diploma registration of 18.11.1999 was too late.¶42
Prior proceeding
Learned Government Advocate further contended that there were no vacancies available, hence the Petitioner's name was not considered.¶43
Prior proceeding
Communication from the Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies dated 19.06.2013 enclosing a sponsorship list showed that persons junior to the Petitioner had also been sponsored.¶43

A.Rani, v. the Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Rani, v. the Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr.a.Kannan, Vs The Medical Council of India

Dr. S.Sridevi, Vs The Joint Director

N.Namasivayam Vs Secretary to Government

S.Kalarani, Vs the Secretary to Government

Mr.Ludan Ram, Vs the Director General

R.Venkateswaran, Vs Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies