DHANALAKSHMI Vs. DIRECTOR, TEACHERS RECRUITMENT BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner's name was sponsored by the Employment Exchange to the respondent for the post of Graduate Teacher. The interview was held on 24.09.2008. But she was not selected. According to the petitioner, her husband is working as Indo -Tibetan Border Police. Therefore, according to her, she is entitled for priority of G.O. Ms. No. 188, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 28.12.1976. The petitioner asked for information under the Right to Information Act in respect of the above. The Information Officer of the respondent, by his Proceedings in O. Mu. No. 722/A3/A2/2008 dated 13.03.2009 informed the petitioner that the petitioner is not entitled for priority as per G.O. Ms. No. 188. Challenging the same, the petitioner is before this Court.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the records carefully.

(3.) IN the result, the writ petition fails and accordingly it is dismissed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.