K BHASKAR Vs. DISTRICT REVENUE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed the Original Application No. 1169 of 1994 on the file of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal praying for a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the records of the first respondent in proceeding Rc. No. 47284/92/i2 dated 2. 2. 1994 and quash the same, and the same has been transferred to the file of this Court and renumbered as W. P. No. 20593 of 2006.

(2.) THE petitioner has challenged the order dated 02. 02. 1994 of the first respondent in and by which, the first respondent has appointed the fourth respondent as a permanent Village Assistant of Seeyathamangai Village of Nannilam Taluk, Nagai Quaid-e-Millet District. It is the case of the petitioner that consequent to the retirement of one Packirisamy on 30. 06. 1991 in Seeyathamangai Village, Nannilam Taluk, Nagai Quaid-e-Millet District, the petitioner along with three other persons applied for the post of Village Assistant. The third respondent, upon assessment of the merits of the candidates, rejected the application of two persons on the ground that they possessed cultivating lands and they were also more qualified. The candidature of the fourth respondent was also rejected by the Tahsildar, by his order dated 27. 01. 1991 on the ground that he possessed cultivating lands in his name and he was not successful in the interview. The Tahsildar found the petitioner to be suitable for the post of Village Assistant and accordingly, the petitioner was appointed on 27. 01. 1991 by the proceedings of the Tahsildar, Nannilam Taluk, third respondent herein. The appeal filed by the fourth respondent to the Sub Collector, Nagapattinam, second respondent herein, was rejected on 29. 05. 1992, confirming the appointment made by the third respondent. In the revision petition filed by the fourth respondent, the first respondent set aside the appointment of the petitioner and consequently, the fourth respondent was permanently appointed as Village Assistant in the above said Village. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed the Original Application before the Tamil Nadu State Administrative Tribunal, which has been subsequently transferred to the file of this Court and renumbered as Writ Petition.

(3.) THE District Revenue Officer, erstwhile Nagai Quaid-e-Millet District, first respondent has filed counter affidavit and contended that consequent to the retirement vacancy of Packirisamy, on 30. 06. 1991, nominations were called for by the Tahsildar, Nannilam Taluk and on 20. 06. 1991, four persons filed their nominations and after due enquiry, the petitioner was appointed as Village Assistant. The appeals preferred by one Thiru Thamizhvanan and the fourth respondent herein were rejected by the second respondent and thereafter, on revision, the District Revenue Officer of the erstwhile Nagai Quaid-e-Millet District found that the petitioner as well as the fourth respondent did not own any property. The revisional authority further assessed the inter-se merits of the first respondent as well as the rival contestant fourth respondent and found that as between the two individuals, the fourth respondent was better qualified, belonged to the Most Backward Community and therefore, found him suitable for the post of Village Assistant. The first respondent has further submitted that the selection of the fourth respondent is proper and does not warrant any interference.