R. Lakshmanan v. the Chief Engineer
Case brief
What is this about?
In this writ petition seeking promotion and seniority, the court held that the petition has become infructuous as the petitioner died in service, and his daughter was appointed via compassionate appointment.
What did the court decide?
The writ petition was closed as infructuous.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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: 16.08.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR
W.P.No.27405 of 2008
K.Lakshmanan
S/o.Kesavaraman
... Petitioner
-Vs.-
- 1.The Chief Engineer (General) Highways, Chepauk, Chepauk-5.
- 2.The Joint Chief Engineer (Administrative) Highways, Chepacuk, Chepauk-5.
- 3.The Superintending Engineer Highways, Madurai-2.
- 4.The Divisional Engineer Highways, Ramanathapuram. .... Respondents
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition stands infructuous due to the death of the petitioner and subsequent compassionate appointment of his daughter?
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
K. Lakshmanan
- respondent
The Chief Engineer (General) Highways, Chepauk
- respondent
The Joint Chief Engineer (Administrative) Highways, Chepauk
- respondent
The Superintending Engineer Highways, Madurai
- respondent
The Divisional Engineer Highways, Ramanathapuram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court