Dismissed

S.Jeyalakshmi v. The Registrar

Madras HC1 Dec 2022WA(MD)/1241/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Appeal challenging a Single Judge order directing Government to decide on qualification equivalence in a university teacher recruitment dispute. Appeal disposed of with direction to Government to act within four weeks after equivalence was declared.

What did the court decide?

Direction to third respondent to pass necessary orders regarding appellant's claim and communicate decision within four weeks. Connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

S.Jeyalakshmi Vs The Registrar — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.A.(MD)No.1241 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 01.12.2022

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN and

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD

¶6

W.A.(MD) No.1241 of 2020 and C.M.P.(MD) Nos.6996 of 2020 and 740 of 2021

¶7

S.Jeyalakshmi

¶8

... Appellant/Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The Registrar,

¶11

Anna University Tiruchirappalli, Anna University Campus, Tiruchirappalli – 620 024.

¶12

2.The Vice Chancellor,

¶13

Anna University Tiruchirappalli, Anna University Campus, Tiruchirappalli – 620 024.

¶14

3.The Secretary to the Government, Ministry of Higher Education, Fort St.George,

¶15

Chennai – 600 009.

¶16

4.V.R.Sharama Dulipala Lecturer, Anna University Tiruchirappalli, Anna University Campus, Tiruchirappalli – 620 024. ... Respondents/Respondents

¶17

Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order dated 21.02.2019 made in W.P.(MD) No.13396 of 2009 and to allow the appeal.

¶18

Prayer in WP(MD). 13396/ 2009 :

¶19

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a WRIT OF CERTIORARIFIED MANDAMUS, to call for the records of the first to third respondents herein namely, the selection List of the first respondent published pursuant to the Recruitment Advertisement No.AU-03-2008 dated https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶20

1/3

¶21

W.A.(MD)No.1241 of 2020

¶22

17.09.2008 seleting the fourth respondent under the General Turn category for the post of Lecturer in Physics with M.Sc.Electronics, and the third respondent's Government order in G.O.Ms.No.452, Higher Education Department, dated 20.10.2015 ratifying the selection and appointment of the fourth respondent without essential qualification w.e.f. 01.08.2012 and all further proceedings arising out of the first respondent's selection list insofar as th fourth respondent herein and quash the same. Consequently, select and appoint the petitioner herein placed 7^th rand under BC category, by selecting and appointing one C.Hirthna placed 7^th rank in GT category in the place of fourth respondent but presently selected and appointed under BC category, to the post of Lecturer in Physics under the BC category with all other attendant service benefits.

¶23

For Appellant : Mr.M.S.Sureshkumar For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.E.V.N.Siva Standing Counsel For 3^rd Respondent : Mr.S.Shaji Bino Special Government Pleader For 4^th Respondent : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai * * *

¶24

J U D G M E N T

¶25

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J. )

¶26

The Writ Appeal has been filed by the appellant/writ petitioner, challenging the order of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(MD) No.13396 of 2009, dated 21.02.2019, by which, the learned Single Judge has disposed of the Writ Petition, challenging the selection of the 4^th respondent, with a direction to the third respondent to come out with an announcement as to whether the M.Sc., Electronics degree obtained by the fourth respondent would meet the eligibility requirement for the post of Lecturer in Physics in Anna University pertaining to the impugned selection.

¶27

Mr.M.S.Sureshkumar, learned counsel for the

¶28

petitioner, Mr.E.V.N.Siva, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, Mr.S.Shaji Bino, learned Special Government Pleader, appearing for the 3^rd respondent and Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai, learned Standing Counsel for the 4^th respondent.

¶29

Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, it is represented that the learned Single Judge has directed the Government to take a call with regard to the equivalence of M.Sc., Electronics degree obtained by the fourth respondent and now, the equivalence result has been arrived at and declared that M.Sc.,

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

2/3

¶32

W.A.(MD)No.1241 of 2020

¶33

Electronics degree obtained by the fourth respondent would (*)not meet the eligibility requirement for the post of Lecturer in Physics in Anna University pertaining to the impugned selection.

¶34

In view of the above, this Writ Appeal is disposed of with a direction to the third respondent to pass necessary orders with regard to the claim of the appellant and communicate the decision taken to the appellant and the fourth respondent within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of the same, it is open to the parties to workout their remedies in the manner known to law. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶35

Assistant Registrar( )

¶36

(*)Corrected as per the order dated 23.01.2023 made in WA.(MD)No.1241/2020 Sd/-

¶37

Assistant Registrar( )

¶38

// True Copy //

¶39

/12/2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶40

¶41

¶42

To be Substituted with the order already despatched on 29.12.2022 The Secretary to the Government, Ministry of Higher Education, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶43

+1 CC to M/s.M.S.SURESH KUMAR, Advocate ( SR-59214[F] dated 01/12/2022 )

¶44

+1 CC to M/s.G.PRABHU RAJADURAI, Advocate ( SR-3649[F] dated 24/01/2023 )

¶45

+1 CC to M/s.SPL.GP ( SR-59828[F] dated 02/12/2022 )

¶46

W.A.(MD) No.1241 of 2020

¶47

01.12.2022

¶48

SI(28.12.2022) 3P 5C SS/10/02/2023) 3P 5C

¶49

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶50

3/3

S.Jeyalakshmi v. The Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Jeyalakshmi v. The Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gnana Floral Vs The Authorised Officer

Chandrasekaran.K Vs The District Collector

M/s. Nayagi Fireworks Factory Vs The Authorized Officer

The District Collector Vs K.Kaliammal

Naveen Wilson Vs The Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry

The Commissioner of Vs Tvl. Bharath Traders