The petition for a writ of mandamus regarding a job interview was dismissed as infructuous because the counsel had endorsed that the relief sought was no longer viable.
None.
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 : 30.10.2019
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
W.P.No.21274 of 2004 and W.M.P.No.25690 of 2004 M.Palaniyandi ... Petitioner v. University of Madras, Rep. By its Registrar, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005. ... Respondent Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to issue a call letter to the petitioner to attend the interview of the post of Reader in Geography that would be held on 23.07.2004 or any other date fixed in terms of the advertisement published in “The Hindu”dated 19th May 2004 by the respondent. For Petitioner : Mr.S. Aravind Raj for Mr. A.Thiagarajan For Respondent : Mr.L.P.Shanmugasundaram O R D E R Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the relief sought for in the Writ Petition has before infructuous and the learned counsel has also made an endorsement to that effect. In view of the same, the Writ Petition stands dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Sd/Assistant Registrar (CS-VIII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar
Rj
To
The Registrar, University of Madras, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.
+1cc to Mr.L.P.Shanmugasundaram, Advocate, S.R.No. 90838
W.P.No.21274 of 2004 and W.M.P.No.25690 of 2004 SPD(CO) GN(28/11/2019)
M. Palaniyandi
University of Madras
M. Duraiswamy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
