This order dismisses two writ petitions as infructuous because the petitioner's counsel submitted that subsequent developments render no adjudication necessary.
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: 05.10.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.No.36897 and 36900 of 2002 &
W.P.M.P. Nos.55460 & 55463 of 2002
S. Deena Jayakumari ... Petitioner in W.P. No.36897 of 2002 K. Kamatchi ... Petitioner in W.P. No.36900 of 2002
Vs
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue an appropriate Order, Directions or Writ including a Writ of Certiorarifi, to call for the records relating to the impugned order issued by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.7181/P2/2002 dated 11.09.2002 and to quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.P. Manoj Kumar (In Both W.Ps.) For Respondents: Mr.R. Vijaya Kumar (In Both W.Ps.) (Addl.Government Pleader) O R D E R
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that due to subsequent developments nothing survives for further adjudication in this writ petition and hence, the writ petition may be dismissed as infructuous. He has also made an endorsement to the said effect.
s/d-
Assistant Registrar(CO)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
lbm
W.P.No.36897 and 36900 of 2002
SK(CO)
sp(01/11/2017)
S. Deena Jayakumari
K. Kamatchi
The District Elementary Educational Officer, Salem-7
The District Elementary Educational Officer, Coonoor-2
S.M.Subramaniam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
