Disposed

C.Vithyabathi, v. the Secretary to Government

Madras HC5 Oct 2018WP/5723/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought a writ of mandamus directing the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission to fix a cut-off date and appoint petitioners against vacancies for the post of Forest Apprentice. The Commission informed the Court that results were already published, leading to the closure of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition stands closed. No order as to costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

C.Vithyabathi, Vs the Secretary to Government — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :05.10.2018 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No. 5723 of 2013 M.P.No. 1 of 2013

¶2

Vithyabathi 2. N.Anand Kumar 3. S.Arumugam 4. M.Umadevi 5. D.Dhixya deve, 6. V.Subbulakshmi 7. S.Gnanasekar 8. V.Rajalingam 9. D.Mary Lency 10.V.Saravanan 11. P.V.Anbu 12. K.Manoj 13. P.Kumar 14. S.Murali 15. G.Bharath ..Petitioners

¶3

¶4

1.The Secretary to Government Forest Department Fort.St.George, Chennai- 600 009.

¶5

The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Head of Forest Force, Panagal Buildings,Chennai.

¶6

The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Chennai � 600 104. .. Respondents

¶7

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 3rd Respondent to fix the cut off date to finalise the recruitment process for the post of Forest Apprentice as indicated by this Court in WP.23073/2013 etc dated 04.01.2012 etc dated 04.01.2013 and appoint the petitioners among 88 Forestry Graduates available against 80 vacancies for the post of Forest Apprentice.

¶8

For Petitioners : Mr.S.Ilamvaludhi

¶9

For Respondents : Mr.M.Loganathan For R3 No appearance For R1 & R2

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

The learned counsel appearing for the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission informed this Court that the very relief sought for in this writ petition is to publish the results and the Commission had

¶12

already published the results.

¶13

Thus, no further adjudication needs to be entertained in respect of the grounds raised in the present writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition stands closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 05.10.2018

¶14

¶15

Internet:Yes/No Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non speaking order

¶16

¶17

1.The Secretary to Government Forest Department Fort.St.George, Chennai- 600 009.

¶18

The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Head of Forest Force, Panagal Buildings, Chennai.

¶19

The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Chennai � 600 104.

¶20

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. sk

¶21

W.P.No. 5723 of 2013

¶22

05.10.2018

C.Vithyabathi, v. the Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.Vithyabathi, v. the Secretary to Government

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

V.Ganesh Vs The District Collector

Tmt.Vanitha Vs the District Collector/

S.Raja Vs Puducherry Power Corporation

S.Kannan Vs the Commissioner Survey and

A.v.Namasivayam Vs the Special Officer

Akaasavalli Vs The Joint Commissioner