Disposed

K.Lakshmanan, v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC18 Feb 2015WP/823/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition questioned the inaction of the first respondent in considering a representation dated 05.06.2013 regarding regularisation of petitioners' services. The Court directed the respondent to dispose of the representation on merits within three months citing G.O.Ms.No.123.

What did the court decide?

Directed the first respondent to consider and dispose of the representation submitted by the petitioners on merits within three months.

K.Lakshmanan, Vs the State of Tamil Nadu — Education and Admissions | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 18.02.2015

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN

¶5

Writ Petition No.823 of 2014

¶6

K.Lakshmanan
2. K.Srinivasan
3. K.Sambath
4. D.Soundarrajan
5. S.Saravanan
6. M.Sundaramoorthy
7. S.Sambath
8. M.Rajendran
9. V.Karikalan
10.V.Baskaran
11.D.Sudhakar
12.C.Yesurathinam .. Petitioners
vs.
1. The State of Tamil Nadu
rep.by its Secretary to Government
School Education Department
Secretariat, Chennai-9.
2. The Director of School Education
DPI Campus, College Road
Chennai-6.
3. The Chief Educational Officer
Vellore District
Vellore.
4. The District Educational Officer
Thiruppathur
Vellore District. ..Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
for the issuance of writ of mandamus to direct the first respondent
to consider the claims of the petitioners and pass orders on the
representation of the petitioners dated 05.06.2013 in regard to
regularise the service of the petitioners from the date of initial
appointment as given to others in G.O.Ms.No.123, School Education
(R1) Department dated 17.08.2011 and extend the benefits of the said

¶7

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶8

Government Order to the petitioners also.

¶9

For Petitioners : Mr.G.Elanchezhiyan For Respondents : Mr.M.S.Ramesh Additional Government Pleader

¶10

The petitioners made a claim to regularise their services with effect from the date of their initial appointment in the light of similar indulgence given to other employees vide order in G.O.Ms.No.123, School Education (R1) Department dated 17.08.2011. Even though a representation to that effect was given on 05.06.2013, there was no follow up action taken by the first respondent. The petitioners are therefore, before this Court.

¶11

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents.

¶12

The first respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the representation submitted by the petitioners on 05.06.2013 on merits and as per law, in the light of G.O.Ms.No.123, School Education (R1) Department dated 17.08.2011. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶13

The writ petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs.

¶14

Sd/Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

¶15

//True Copy//

¶16

vj2

¶17

To 1. The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu School Education Department Secretariat, Chennai-9.

¶18

The Director of School Education DPI Campus, College Road Chennai-6.

¶19

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶20

The Chief Educational Officer Vellore District Vellore.

¶21

The District Educational Officer Thiruppathur Vellore District.

¶22

1 cc to Mr. .G.Elanchezhiyan,Advocate, SR.No.9069

¶23

W.P.No.823 of 2014

¶24

ug(co)
pmk.9.3.2015

¶25

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

K.Lakshmanan, v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Lakshmanan, v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Ramasamy Vs The Director of Animal

D.Roselin Joyce, Vs Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies

S.Alexraj Vs The State of Tamilnadu

S.Johnbosco Vs the Chief Engineer

M.Hemavathi Vs The Commissioner

R.Pravin Raj, Vs State of Tamil Nadu