Disposed

Kulandaivelu v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC28 Sept 2021WP/20835/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition was disposed of at the time of admission. The High Court directed the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation from September 1, 2021, in accordance with a government order dated September 3, 2020, and pass appropriate orders within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders within six weeks.

Kulandaivelu Vs The State of Tamil Nadu — Education and Admissions | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 28.09.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶5

W.P.No.20835 of 2021

¶6

(Through Video Conferencing)

Kulandaivelu

... Petitioner

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Secretary, Higher Education Department,

¶11

Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

¶12

2.The Commissioner of Technical Education, No.53, Sardar Patel Road, Chennai – 25.

¶13

3.The Registrar, Annamalai University, Annamalai Nagar, Chidambaram.

¶14

4.The State Commissioner, Welfare of the Differently Abled, No.5, Kamarajar Salai,

¶15

Lady Wellington College Campus, Chennai – 600 005.

¶16

... Respondents

¶17

Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner dated 01.09.2021 in the light of G.O.Ms.No.107, dated 03.09.2020, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (S) Department.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.K.C.Karl Marx

¶19

For Respondents: For R1 & R2 : Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal Government Advocate For R3 : Mr.K.Sathish Kumar Standing Counsel

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal, learned Government Advocate takes notice on behalf of the first and second respondents and Mr.K.Sathish Kumar, learned Standing Counsel takes notice on https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ behalf of the third respondent.

¶22

2.Considering the limited nature of prayer in this writ petition, this writ petition is disposed at the time of admission by directing the 2^nd respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 01.09.2021 and pass appropriate orders on merits within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶23

Sd/-

¶24

Assistant Registrar (CS-VIII)

¶25

//True Copy//

¶26

Sub Assistant Registrar

jas

1.The Secretary,

Government of Tamil Nadu,

¶31

Higher Education Department,

¶32

Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

¶33

2.The Commissioner of Technical Education,

¶34

No.53, Sardar Patel Road, Chennai – 25.

¶35

3.The Registrar, Annamalai University, Annamalai Nagar, Chidambaram.

¶36

4.The State Commissioner,

¶37

Welfare of the Differently Abled, No.5, Kamarajar Salai, Lady Wellington College Campus, Chennai – 600 005.

¶38

+1cc to Mr.K.C.Karl Marx, Advocate, S.R.No.50038

¶39

+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.50894

¶40

W.P.No.20835 of 2021

¶41

AD(CO) GN(28/10/2021)

¶42

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

Kulandaivelu v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kulandaivelu v. The State of Tamil Nadu

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

P.Mangayarkarasi Vs State of Tamil Nadu

R.Seethalakshmi Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

D. Lucas Vs Tamil Nadu Water supply and

Daisyrani Vs The Institute of Road Transport

D.Lathamary Vs The Institute of Road Transport

K.Krishnan Vs The Secretary to