A batch of writ petitions challenging the non-selection of petitioners as Deputy Thasildars was dismissed as infructuous because the panel under challenge had already lapsed.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21.07.2017
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
W.P.Nos.30059 to 30065 of 2004
1.Ramanujam ... Petitioner in W.P.No.30059 of 2004 2.V.Ramalingam ... Petitioner in W.P.No.30060 of 2004 3.T.Ramachandran ... Petitioner in W.P.No.30061 of 2004 4.K.Devarajan ... Petitioner in W.P.No.30062 of 2004 5.A.Tamilarasan ... Petitioner in W.P.No.30063 of 2004 6.Sobiya Jothi Bai ... Petitioner in W.P.No.30064 of 2004 7.V.Ravi ... Petitioner in W.P.No.30065 of 2004 ...Petitioners
vs. 1. The Government of Tamil Nadu, rep. by the Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
Kancheepuram. ...Respondents in
W.P.Nos.30059 to 30065 of 2004
Prayer in W.P's.No.30059 to 30065 of 2004: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to seeking Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for records of the 3rd respondent in his proceedings in Naka.65187/97/A3 dated 27.03.1998 and subsequent final list of Deputy Thasildars Panel of the 3rd respondent vide his proceedings in Na.Ka.A3/17437/99 dated 04.12.2001 and to quash the same as illegal improper, against the rule and principle of natural justice and thereby direct the respondents to prepare panel for every year and promote the petitioner as Deputy Thasildar with retrospective effect from 1998,1999,2000,2002 onwards and award monetary and service benefits.
For Petitioners (in All WPs.) : Mr.M.Bharathi Mohan
For Respondents(in All WPs.) : Mr.Balamurugan
G.A. (w) (for R1 to R3)
ORDER
These are batch of writ petitions filed in the year 2004 challenging the preparation of Deputy Thasildars Panel in proceedings Naka.65187/97/A3 dated 27.03.1998 and subsequent final list of Deputy Thasildars Panel proceedings in Na.Ka.A3/17437/99 dated 04.12.2001. During the earlier hearing on 07.07.2017, the learned Counsel for the petitioner sought time for getting instructions and report to this Court whether anything survives in all these writ petitions. As seen from the records, most of them may have attained superannuating now. Today once again, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has sought further time for getting instructions for which the learned Government Advocate, Mr.Balamurugan, reported that panel prepared by the 3rd respondent which is under challenge in all these writ petitions has already lapsed and nothing survives in all these matters.
2.I am also satisfied that no useful purpose would be served, if further time is granted to the petitioner for getting instructions.
3.I therefore, dismiss all these batch of writ petitions as infructuous. No costs.
Sd/Deputy Registrar(J)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
Pam
To
W.P.Nos.30059 to 30065 of 2004
RR(CO)
CU(16/08/2017)
Ramanujam et al.
Government of Tamil Nadu
Abdul Qudhose
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
