Dismissed

The Government of Tamil Nadu v. Sr.P.Geetha

Madras HC8 Nov 2018WA/603/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An appeal under Letters Patent against an order quashing a State Government order and directing approval of the petitioner's appointment. The High Court held that since the Government had approved the appointment prior to the hearing, the appeal was infructuous and was dismissed as such.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal was dismissed as infructuous after the court recorded a submission that the impugned order had already been complied with.

The Government of Tamil Nadu Vs Sr.P.Geetha — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 08.11.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH and

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶6

W.A.No.603 of 2016

¶7

1.The Government of Tamilnadu, Rep. by the Addl. Chief Secretary, Dept. of School Education, Fort St. George, Madras 600 009.

¶8

2.The Director of Primary Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006.

¶9

3.The District Elementary Educational Officer, The Office of the District Elementary Educational Officere, Tiruppur, Tiruppur District.

¶10

4.The Additional Elementary Educational Officer, The Office of the Additional Elementary Educational Officer, Dharapuram Range, Dharapuram, Tiruppur District. .. Appellants/Respondent 1 to 4 -vs1.Sr.P.Geetha .. Respondent/Petitioner

¶11

2.The Correspondent, St.Aloysius Primary School, Dharapuram, Tiruppur District. .. Respondents/5^th Respondent

¶12

Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 31.07.2015 passed in M.P.No.3 of 2015 in W.P.No.6782 of 2015 on the file of this Court.

¶13

WP No.6782/2011 : Writ of Certioraified mandamus Calling for the records pertaining to the impugned G.O.(Ms).No.181 School Education (C2) Department dated 15.11.2011 on the file of the 1st respondent and and quash the same in respect of the petitioner and consequently directing the respondents to approve

¶14

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

¶15

the appointment of the petitioner Sr.P.Geetha as Secondary Grade Assistant in St. Aloysius Primary School Dharapuram Tiruppur District w.e.f. 18.7.2012 with all service benefits

¶16

For Appellants : Mr.C.Munusamy, Spl.G.P. For Respondents : Dr.Fr.A.Xavier Arul Raj for R-1 J U D G M E N T (Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.) When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Special Government Pleader submitted that the approval has already been given in favour of the first respondent and hence, nothing survives in this writ appeal. Recording the above submission, this writ appeal is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Sd/Assistant Registrar //True copy// Sub Assistant Registrar sra To 1.The Addl. Chief Secretary to Govt. of Tamilnadu, Dept. of School Education, Fort St. George, Madras 600 009. 2.The Director of Primary Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006. 3.The District Elementary Educational Officer, The Office of the District Elementary Educational Officere, Tiruppur, Tiruppur District.

¶17

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

¶18

4.The Additional Elementary Educational Officer, The Office of the Additional Elementary Educational Officer, Dharapuram Range, Dharapuram, Tiruppur District.

¶19

+1cc to Government Pleader SR.No.77055

¶20

W.A.No.603 of 2016

¶21

PP(CO) GMY(24/12/2018

¶22

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

The Government of Tamil Nadu v. Sr.P.Geetha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Government of Tamil Nadu v. Sr.P.Geetha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bernard Antony D sylva Vs Union of India rep by the

Union of India Vs The Registrar

R.Ravimaran Vs Union Of India