Disposed

N.Ganesan v. the Director

Madras HC10 Feb 2017WP/23851/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought a mandamus directing the 1st respondent to obtain an experience certificate in a specific format from the 3rd respondent. The Supreme Court observed that the certificate had already been issued to the petitioner in a general form, and as such, the writ petition was disposed of with liberty to approach the authorities if needed in the future.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the 3rd respondent-college if necessary in the future.

N.Ganesan Vs the Director — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 10.02.2017

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. KRISHNAKUMAR

¶5

W.P. No. 23851 of 2013

¶6

N.Ganesan .. Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

1.The Director, Directorate of Collegiate Education, Chennai 600 006.

¶9

2.The Joint Director (Education), Office of the Joint Director Education, Coimbatore.

¶10

3.The Principal Vysya College, Ramakrishnapuramm Masinaickenpatty, Salem District. .. Respondents

¶11

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1^st respondent to take appropriate steps to get experience certificate of petitioner from 3^rd respondent for the period of 02.12.2002 to 02.04.2004 in the form of Annexure V, which is specified in the prospectus of Direct Recruitment of Assistant Professors in Tamil Nadu Collegiate Education Service for Government Arts and Sciences Colleges 2012.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Saravanan

¶13

For RR 1 & 2 : Mr.S.Diwakar, SGP For 3^rd Respondent : Mr.A.Seshan

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

The Writ Petition has been filed praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1^st respondent to take appropriate steps to get experience certificate of petitioner from 3^rd respondent for the period of 02.12.2002 to 02.04.2004 in the form of Annexure V, which is specified in the prospectus of Direct Recruitment of Assistant Professors in Tamil Nadu Collegiate Education Service for Government Arts and Sciences Colleges 2012.

¶16

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

¶17

Heard Mr.P.Saravanan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.S.Diwakar, learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.A.Seshan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 3rd respondent.

¶18

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 3^rd respondent has to issue the experience certificate to the petitioner for the period, from 02.12.2002 to April 2004 in the form of Annexure V, which is specified in the prospectus of Direct Recruitment of Assistant Professors in Tamil Nadu Collegiate Education Service for Government Arts and Sciences Colleges 2012.

¶19

The Learned counsel appearing for the 3^rd respondent submitted that the aforesaid experience certificate had been issued to the petitioner and the same has been furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioner, duly acknowledged, seeks liberty to approach the 3^rd respondentauthority for issuing the certificate in the form of Annexure V, if necessary in future. 5. Hence, in view of the above said issuance of Experience Certificate, the Writ Petition is disposed of, with a liberty to the petitioner to approach the 3^rd respondent-college, if necessary, in future. 6. The Writ Petition is disposed of, on the above terms. No costs. Sd/Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar To 1.The Director, Directorate of Collegiate Education, Chennai 600 006. 2.The Joint Director (Education), Office of the Joint Director Education, Coimbatore. +1cc to Government Pleader SR. 9033 +1cc to Mr. P. Saravanan, Advcate SR. 8726

¶20

W.P. No. 23851 of 2013 KJI(CO) VR(10/03/2017)

¶21

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

N.Ganesan v. the Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Ganesan v. the Director

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. Syedmusthafa Vs the District Collector

Tmt.Anjalakshi Vs the Tahsildhar

R.Palanisamy Vs the Chief Engineer

K.Ponniah, Vs Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance

K.Shanmugam Vs the Assistant Director of

A.Ravi Vs the District Employment