Petitioners challenged an impugned order of appointment of Jayaraj as Headmaster in a minority school overlooking their seniority. The court noted that appointments and petitions were filed years ago, parties have now retired, rendering the writ petitions moot.
Writ petitions closed as parties have retired and no relief survives.
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
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09.12.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH
W.P.Nos.2202 and 2364 of 2003
A.Ramalingam .. Petitioner in W.P.2202/2003 T.S.Sugantha .. Petitioner in W.P.2364/2003
Vs
1.Director of School Education Chennai -6.
2.District Educational Officer Chennai (South), Chennai 8.
3.Correspondent & Secretary Kesari Higher Secondary School T.Nagar, Chennai 17.
4.S.Jayaraj Headmaster Kesari Higher Secondary School T.Nagar, Chennai 17.
Respondents in both W.Ps.
Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by the 3rd respondent in his proceedings No.Nil, dated 29.08.2000 and quash the same, and direct the respondents to appoint the petitioners as Headmaster of the 3rd respondent School and confer all the consequential benefits.
For petitioners : Mr.P.Ganesan For R1 and R2 : Mr.S.Pattabiraman Govt.Advocate For R3 : Ms.P.Mahalakshmi
2
O R D E R
These petitions have been filed calling for the records pertaining to
the order passed by the 3rd respondent in his proceedings No.Nil, dated 29.08.2000 and quash the same, and direct the respondents to appoint the petitioners as Headmaster of the 3rd respondent School and confer all the consequential benefits.
3
teachers. One can have no quarrel with the aforesaid proposition of law. However, even according to the petitioners, the appointment of Jayaraj was made in the year 2001 and the writ petitions were filed only in the year 2003 and now both Jayaraj and the petitioners have retired.
Under such circumstances, nothing survives in these writ petitions and
accordingly the same are closed. No costs.
09.12.2016
gms
To
1.Director of School Education Chennai -6.
2.District Educational Officer Chennai (South), Chennai 8.
3.Correspondent & Secretary Kesari Higher Secondary School T.Nagar, Chennai 17.
4
P.N.PRAKASH, J.
gms
W.P Nos.2202 and 2364 of 2003
09.12.2016
2 issues framed by the court
Whether writ petitions for quashing of appointment order and directing apprehension of appointment survive after retirement of parties.
Whether declaration serves purpose if petitioners and appointee have retired.
A.Ramalingam
T.S.Sugantha
Director of School Education, Chennai
District Educational Officer, Chennai
Correspondent & Secretary, Kesari Higher Secondary School
S.Jayaraj
P.N.PRAKASH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
