The Madurai Bench clarified that a writ of mandamus cannot direct promotion. Instead, the direction to consider the petitioner's request for promotion must be issued within a month given that the punishment order was stayed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 28/4/2015
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN
Writ Petition (MD) No.6932 of 2015 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2015
Manikanth
... Petitioner
Vs
1.The Director of School Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai.
2.The Joint Director of School Education, (Personnel), DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai.
3.The Chief Educational Officer, Kanyakumari District.
4.The District Educational Officer, Kuzhithurai, Kanyakumari District.
... Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to promote the petitioner in the pot of Regular Superintendent and further post him as Regular Superintendent at Assistant Elementary Educational Office (AEEO), Sathankulam, Tuticorin District, on the basis of counselling held on 20.12.2014 at Chennai, as per the communication from the 2nd respondent in Na.Ka.No.23253/A3/E1/2014, dated 17.12.2014.
For Petitioner ... Mr.V.Sankaranarayanan
For Respondents ... Mr.V.Muruganandam, AGP
O R D E R
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ This Writ Petition has been filed, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to promote the petitioner in the pot of Regular Superintendent and further post
2
him as Regular Superintendent at Assistant Elementary Educational Office (AEEO), Sathankulam, Tuticorin District, on the basis of counselling held on 20.12.2014 at Chennai, as per the communication from the 2nd respondent in Na.Ka.No.23253/A3/E1/2014, dated 17.12.2014.
3.The case of the petitioner is that he has not been promoted on the ground of punishment and that punishment order has been stayed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.196 of 2015, on 08.01.2015. The petitioner has also stated that he has made a representation on 22.04.2015 stating that, since the punishment order has been stayed, his case has to be considered for promotion. The petitioner vehemently contended that this Court should direct the respondents to promote him to the post of Regular Superintendent, since the order of punishment has been stayed by this Court.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(C.O)
/True Copy/
Sub-Assistant Registrar
3
To
1.The Director of School Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai. 2.The Joint Director of School Education, (Personnel), DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai. 3.The Chief Educational Officer, Kanyakumari District. 4.The District Educational Officer, Kuzhithurai, Kanyakumari District. +One cc to Mr.V.Sankaranarayanan, Advocate, SR.No.23769 mpk RL/ 6c- 13/5/2015 Writ Petition (MD) No.6932 of 2015 28/4/2015
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the court can issue a writ of mandamus directing promotion of a petitioner whose punishment order is stayed.
Whether the petitioner can seek a mandatory direction for promotion or only a direction to consider his request for promotion.
Manikanth
The Director of School Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai
S. Vaidyanathan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
