R. MUTHUMEENA Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, VIRUDHUNAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE prayer in this writ petition is seeking for a Mandamus, directing the respondents to renew the petitioner's registration in District Employment Office in Registration No.15/967/96 along with the seniority from the initial date of registration and restore the seniority.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that she passed M.A., M.Ed., and was doing M.Phil., in History also B.A., in Indian Music. The petitioner got married in the year 1987 and was driven out of matrimonial home in the year 1994. Thereafter, she got employed as domestic helper for meager salary of Rs.300/- per month. Subsequently, she completed B.A in History and B.Ed., degree. After completion of the same, the petitioner registered her name in the 2nd respondent Employment Office on 28.05.1996 with Registration No.15/967/96 with Occupation Code No.151/10. The petitioner subsequently renewed her registration in May 1999 and again in the month of May 2002. The petitioner subsequently acquired the additional qualifications of M.A. in History and M.Ed in History and the petitioner renewed her registration in May 2002. As she was suffering from Prolectomania, she was unable to renew the registration in the month of May 2005. However, she applied for renewal in June 2006 after a delay of eleven months. The petitioner was under the impression that her registration was renewed. However, when she was not permitted to participate in an interview conducted for selection to the post of Teachers during the month of December 2006, she came to know that her registration was not renewed by the 2nd respondent. On verification, the petitioner was given to understand that some mistake has been committed by the 2nd respondent and her registration has been allotted to some other third party and as such, the said third party also got an employment. The 2nd respondent also refused to renew the registration of the petitioner inspite of her repeated representations. Therefore, the present writ petition is filed before this Court.

(3.) A reply affidavit is filed by the petitioner in which it is stated that she had applied for renewal in the month of June 2006 by dropping the application in a box placed in the Office of the 2nd respondent. It is further stated by the petitioner that on verification, she was given to understand that in the ledger / live register her name was shown as Thangameena instead of Muthumeena with some other address. It is further stated by the petitioner that the Government of Tamil Nadu granted concession to candidates to renew their employment registration periodically and therefore, the petitioner's request ought to have been considered by the 2nd respondent.