Partly allowed

Dr.G. Reegan, v. State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC21 Jul 2015WP(MD)/12425/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the Director of Collegiate Education to approve his appointment as Assistant Professor within a specific time limit. The Single Judge disposed of the petition by directing the respondent to consider the proposal on merits and pass appropriate orders within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 2nd respondent to consider the proposal and pass appropriate orders within two months from the date of receipt of the order.

Dr.G. Reegan, Vs State of Tamil Nadu — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 21.07.2015

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN

¶5

W.P.(MD)No.12425 of 2015

¶6

O.Reegan

¶7

... Petitioner Vs.

¶8

1.The Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu, Higher Education,

¶9

Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009.

¶10

2.The Director of Collegiate Education, College Road, Chennai 600 006.

¶11

3.The Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Tirunelveli Region, Tirunelveli 627 002.

¶12

4.The Correspondent and Secretary, Nesamony Memorial Christian College,

¶13

Marthandam, Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents

¶14

PRAYER: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2^nd respondent to pass orders on the proposal sent by the 4^th respondent in Ref.No.CCM/2015: 258 dated 01.04.2015 seeking approval of the appointment of the petitioner in the post of Assistant Professor in History with effect from the date of appointment vide the appointment order dated 19.02.2015 within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy For Respondents : Mr.R.Anandraj, G.A.for R1 to R3 ****

¶16

The Writ petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2^nd respondent to pass orders on the proposal sent by the 4^th respondent in Ref.No.CCM/2015: 258, dated 01.04.2015, seeking approval of the appointment of the petitioner https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ in the post of Assistant Professor in History with effect from the date of appointment, vide the appointment order dated 19.02.2015, within a time frame.

¶17

¶18

2.Mr.R.Anandraj, learned Government Advocate takes notice for the respondents 1 to 3. By consent, the Writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

¶19

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it

¶20

would suffice, if the proposal sent by the 4^th respondent in Ref.No.CCM/2015:258, dated 01.04.2015, seeking approval of the appointment of the petitioner in the post of Assistant Professor in History with effect from the date of appointment, vide the appointment order dated 19.02.2015, is disposed of, on merits and in accordance with law, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶21

4.In view of the limited scope of the prayer, the second

¶22

respondent is directed to consider the proposal sent by the 4^th respondent in Ref.No.CCM/2015: 258, dated 01.04.2015 on merits and in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶23

5.With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶24

Sd/

¶25

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (WRIT)

¶26

/TRUE COPY/

¶27

SUB ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶28

nbj

¶29

¶30

1.The Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu, Higher Education, Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009.

¶31

2.The Director of Collegiate Education, College Road, Chennai 600 006.

¶32

3.The Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Tirunelveli Region, Tirunelveli 627 002.

¶33

- 1 CC to M/s.T.Lajapathi Roy, ADV SR.No.40048 + 1 CC to Spl.Govt.Pleader SR.No.40333

¶34

W.P.(MD)No.12425 of 2015

¶35

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

¶36

JMN - 01.08.2015 - 2P - 6C

¶37

21.07.2015

Dr.G. Reegan, v. State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.G. Reegan, v. 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

Bonfiglioli Transmissions P Lt Vs The Assistant Commissioner(Ct)

T.V. Devarajan Vs the Director General of

Christal Mary, Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

Minor Anudharani Repd. by Vs the Secretary

K.Kasinathan Vs the Regional Manager

K.Kannathasan Vs the Registrar of Cooperative