PARVATHI Vs. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prayer in the writ petition is for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records, pertaining to the impugned letter sent by the 3rd respondent, by his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.853/PDS2(2) dated 12.04.2010 and to quash the same and also directing the 2nd respondent to select and appoint the petitioner to the post of salesmen in public distribution system, in the Fair Price Shops in Tirunelveli District.

(2.) The petitioner name had been sponsored for appointment as salesman in fair price shops under the first respondent. Though her name has been sponsored and according to the petitioner she is senior than the fourth respondent, the official respondents have selected the fourth respondent, whereas the petitioner being senior had been omitted to be selected. Therefore, she had made a request to the first respondent and such request has been rejected by the impugned order dated 12.04.2010. Challenging the same, the present writ petition has been filed.

(3.) The only ground urged by the petitioner is that since the petitioner when compared with the employment seniority of the 4th respondent, is senior and seniority will have its own marks and according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner if 10 marks are given for the seniority of the petitioner, she would have reached the zone of consideration and accordingly would have been selected.