A writ petition challenging the legality of a voluntary retirement clause and scheme was dismissed as infructuous by the Madras High Court because the petitioner's counsel endorsed that the matter had become academic.
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: 01.10.2018 CORAM:
THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE S.VIMALA Writ Petition No.22833 of 2004 & WPMP Nos.27608 & 27609 of 2004
Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of declaration to declare clause III (d), viz., "The Application once submitted to Management seeking Voluntary Retirement under the Scheme is Final and Irrevocable", as Dr. S.VIMALA, J.,
srk
illegal, void and inoperative and direct the respondents herein not to implement voluntary scheme notified under the notice bearing Ref No.ADMN/VRS, dated 31.03.2003 and as extended in the notice, dated 07.05.2003 in respect of the petitioners.
For Petitioners : Mr. M.Suresh For R-1 & R-2 : No Appearance For R-3 : Mr. J.Madhana Gopala Rao, CGSC
O R D E R
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the issue involved in this writ petition has become infructuous. The learned counsel has also made an endorsement in the Court bundle, today, to that effect.
petitioners, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, the connected WPMPs are closed.
01.10.2018 srk To
Writ Petition No.22833 of 2004 & WPMP Nos.27608 & 27609 of 2004
Santhamurthur and others
H.T.L. Limited
Union of India
Dr. Justice S.Vimala
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
