R.NADIYA Vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above writ petition has been filed for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the order passed by the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.B2/1166/2007, dated 23.02.2010 and the consequential order passed in Na.Ka.No.B2/3146/2010, dated 26.03.2010 and quash the same and to direct the second respondent to appoint the petitioner in the post of Village Assistant in Kallarathinipatti Village.

(2.) The petitioner's case is that on 06.01.2010, a paper publication was made calling for applications from eligible candidates for the post of Village Assistant at Kallarathinipatti Village in Sivagangai District. Pursuant to this, the petitioner's name was sponsored through the employment exchange and she was called for an interview to appear on 29.01.2010. According to the petitioner, she was the only person to attend the interview for the said post before the third respondent. But, on 23.02.2010, the third respondent has appointed the fourth respondent as Village Assistant in Kallarathinipatti Village. It was the further case of the petitioner that she approached the third respondent by way of a representation relating to her non -appointment and that the third respondent has replied that the petitioner could not be appointed as the appointment of the petitioner, being a female candidate, would not be appropriate having regard to the law and order problem in the said village.

(3.) Sum and substance, the points raised by the petitioner counsel Mr.C.Vakeeswaran are three fold.