Dismissed

L.Giniba, v. the Secretary

Madras HC5 Nov 2019WP/10019/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioners filed a writ petition seeking appointment to the post of Rehabilitation Officer and quashing of an employment notice. The writ petition was subsequently declared infructuous by the petitioner's counsel. The High Court dismissed the petition as infructuous and closed the connected miscellaneous petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. The connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

L.Giniba, Vs the Secretary — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATE : 05.11.2019

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

¶5

W.P.No.10019 of 2013 and

¶6

M.P.No.2 of 2013

¶7

L.Giniba ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs 1. The Secretary, Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment, New Delhi. 2. The Director General, National Institute for Empowerment of persons with Multiple Disabilities(NIEPMD), Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Government of India, New Delhi. 3. The Director, National Institute for Empowerment, of persons with Multiple Disabilities(NIEPMD), Department of Social Justice & Empowerment, Government of India, Muttukadu, East Coast Road, Kovalam Post, Tamil Nadu 603 112. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to Employment Notice No.04/2012 issued by the third respondent herein so far as S.No.2 is concerned, relating to filing up of one post of Rehabilitation Officer in Special Education Group B/Technical/Rs.9300-34800(PB-2) Grade Pay Rs.4600/- upon Deputation basis and to quash the same and consequently to direct the respondents to appoint the Petitioner to the Post of Rehabilitation Officer, Special Education Group B/Technical/Rs.9300-34800(PB-2) Grade Pay Rs.4600/-. For Petitioner : Mr.C.N.Ehoma Saviour For Respondents : No appearance

¶9

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

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the writ petition has become infructuous. She has also made necessary endorsement to that effect in the memorandum of the writ petition.

¶12

2.In view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner across the bar and the endorsement made in the memorandum of the writ petition, the writ petition is dismissed as infructous. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶13

-s/d-
Assistant Registrar(CCC)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
tsg
To
1. The Secretary,
Ministry of Social Justice &
Empowerment,
New Delhi.
2. The Director General,
National Institute for Empowerment of persons
with multiple Disabilities(NIEPMD),
Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment,
Government of India,
New Delhi.
3. The Director,
National Institute for Empowerment,
of persons with Multiple Disabilities(NIEPMD),
Department of Social Justice & Empowerment,
Government of India,
Muttukadu, East Coast Road,
Kovalam Post, Tamil Nadu 603 112.
PA(CO)
SP(06/12/2019)

¶14

W.P.No.10019 of 2013 and M.P.No.2 of 2013

¶15

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

L.Giniba, v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

L.Giniba, v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N.Nadanasabapathy Vs Sivasundaravalli

G.Raviraj Vs Devaraj

M.Srinivasan, Vs the Government of Tamil Nadu

M.Archana, Vs Government of Tamil Nadu

S.Velu Vs State of Tamilnadu

P.Krishnammal, Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu