A KALAI SELVI Vs. TAHSILDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short facts of the case are as follows:

(2.) The petitioners further submit that they were selected among others as they had the required qualification and fared well in the Test. They were issued appointment orders posting them in villages, where the posts of Village Assistants were vacant. <FRM>JUDGEMENT_390_LAWS(MAD)9_2015.html</FRM>

(3.) The petitioners further submit that as soon as they received the appointment orders posting them in respective villages as Village Assistants, they reported for duty on 06.05.2007 in the office of the Tahsildar, Virudachalam. They had also reported before the concerned Village Administrative Officer. They were not permitted to join duty. They were asked by the Tahsildar orally to contact him after 30 days. They contacted the Tahsildar after 30 days. The Tahsildar asked them again to contact him after 60 days. They contacted the Tahsildar as per his directions. No reply was given. They tried to meet the District Collector of Cuddalore on 22.09.2007. They were not allowed to see him. The petitioners further submit that they wrote individually a representation to the respondents on 03.10.2007 and sent it by Registered Post, but there was neither any reply nor were they permitted to join duty. Hence, this writ petition.