Disposed

Dr. R.Thiagarajan, v. Tamil Nadu Veterinary &

Madras HC4 Apr 2022WP/16302/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the recruitment method in a writ petition seeking appointment. The respondent stated the petitioner had already been appointed, rendering the main prayer infructuous. The court closed the petition but granted liberty regarding a retrospective appointment claim.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition closed. Liberty granted to make a representation for retrospective notional appointment.

Dr. R.Thiagarajan, Vs Tamil Nadu Veterinary & — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 04.04.2022

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH

¶5

W.P.No.16302 of 2013 and M.P.No.2 of 2013

¶6

Dr.R.Thiagarajan ...Petitioner

¶7

-Vs-

¶8

Tamil Nadu Veterinary & Animal Sciences University, Rep. by its Registrar, Madhavaram Milk Colony, Chennai - 600 051.

¶9

...Respondent

¶10

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the Recruitment Advertisement No.2/2013, dated 03.04.2013, issued by the respondent and quash the same insofar it relates to the method of scoring Academic Performance Indicators (API) and Performance Based Appraisal System (PBAS), in respect of the petitioner, and consequently direct the respondent to select and appoint the petitioner to the post of Professor in Animal Genetics & Breeding and Instructional Livestock Farm Complex, within a time frame.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal

¶12

For Respondent : Mr.V.Gangatharan

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The claim of the petitioner in the present writ petition is for selection and appointment to the post of Professor in Animal Genetics & Breeding and Instructional Livestock Farm Complex.

¶15

Pending the writ petition, it is now stated that the petitioner herein has been appointed as a Professor in the concerned department. As such, the prayer sought for in the present writ petition has become infructuous.

¶16

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

¶17

The learned counsel for the petitioner claims that though the petitioner has been appointed, he is entitled for retrospective notional appointment. In case the petitioner is of that view, liberty is hereby granted to him to make a representation to the respondent and on receipt of the same, the respondent shall consider it on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶18

With the above liberty, the Writ Petition stands closed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/-

Deputy Registrar(CS)

//True copy//

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶23

hvk

¶24

¶25

The Registrar, Tamil Nadu Veterinary & Animal Sciences University, Madhavaram Milk Colony, Chennai - 600 051.

¶26

+1cc to Mr.V.Gangatharan, Advocate SR.No.22584

¶27

+1cc to Mr.A.Mohamed Ismail, Advocate SR.No.22886

¶28

W.P.No.16302 of 2013 and M.P.No.2 of 2013

¶29

SVI(CO) GMY(12/04/2022)

¶30

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

Dr. R.Thiagarajan, v. Tamil Nadu Veterinary &

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. R.Thiagarajan, v. Tamil Nadu Veterinary &

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

Mohamed Fakrudeen @ Munir Vs The Sub Inspector of Police

M.Kaleelullah Sheriff Vs The Sub Inspector of Police

Mohamed Fakrudeen @ Munir Vs The Inspector of Police

S.Velu Vs Supriya Sahu I.A.S.

Dr. R.Prakash Krupakaran, Vs Tamil Nadu Veterinary &

Dr. a.Arivuchelvan, Vs Tamil Nadu Veterinary &