Dismissed

P.Sarangapani v. the Chief Educational Officer

Madras HC30 Oct 2019WP(MD)/19400/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 to quash an impugned order and continue in service as a BT Assistant. The petitioner's counsel argued the petition had become infructuous. The Court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous, with no costs awarded.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition was dismissed as infructuous. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

P.Sarangapani Vs the Chief Educational Officer — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.19400 of 2019

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 30.10.2019 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI W.P.(MD) No.19400 of 2019 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.15842 and 15843 of 2019

P.Sarangapani

... Petitioner

-Vs-

1.The Chief Educational Officer

¶8

Office of the Chief Educational Officer

¶9

Tanjore District

¶10

2.The Head Master Government Higher Secondary School Thiruvonam

¶11

Tanjore District 614 614 ...Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Ref.Na.Ka.No.5157/A4/2018, dated 19.08.2019 on the file of the respondent No.1 and quash the same as illegal and consequently, direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to continue in service as B.T.Assistant (English) at Government Higher Secondary School, Thiruvonam within the time period stipulated by this Court.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lajapathiroy For R1 : Mr.M.Karuppasamy Government Advocate

¶14

ORDER

¶15

This Writ petition has been filed to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Ref.Na.Ka.No.5157/A4/2018, dated 19.08.2019 on the file of the respondent No.1 and quash the same as illegal and consequently, direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to continue in service as B.T.Assistant (English) at Government Higher Secondary School, Thiruvonam within the time period stipulated by this Court.

¶16

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the relief sought for in the Writ Petition has become infructuous and hence, nothing survives for adjudication in this petition.

¶17

Recording the aforesaid submission made by the learned https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶18

1/2

¶19

W.P.(MD) No.19400 of 2019

¶20

counsel appearing for the petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶21

Sd/Assistant Registrar (AD II) // True Copy //

¶22

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶23

msa

¶24

¶25

The Chief Educational Officer Office of the Chief Educational Officer Tanjore District

¶26

+1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-95116[F] dated 31/10/2019 ) +1 CC to M/s.T.LAJAPATHI ROY, Advocate ( SR-95144[F] dated 31/10/2019 )

¶27

W.P.(MD) No.19400 of 2019 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.15842 and 15843 of 2019 30.10.2019

¶28

KK/SAR/26.11.2019/2P-4C/

¶29

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

¶30

2/2

P.Sarangapani v. the Chief Educational Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Sarangapani v. the Chief Educational Officer

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

A.K.Akilandeswar, Vs the Secretary to Government

M.Uma Maheswari Vs The Principal Secretary to Govt.

D.Ayya Kannu Vs the Management

G.Mariyappan Vs the Chief Engineer

M.Mahendran Vs the Secretary to Govt.

P. Kundan Vs the Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies