Disposed

The Government of Tamil Nadu v. S. Ramalingam

Madras HC16 Aug 2023WA/1317/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court appellate bench disposed of a writ appeal seeking relaxation for promotion. The court observed that the department had already granted the benefit to the contesting respondents via a dated order. Consequently, there was no question for consideration, and the appeal was disposed of without costs.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal was disposed of without costs after finding that the relief sought had already been granted by the department.

The Government of Tamil Nadu Vs S. Ramalingam — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.A.No.1317 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 16.08.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU

¶7

W.A.No.1317 of 2019

¶8

and

¶9

C.M.P.No.8968 of 2019

¶10

1.The Government of Tamil Nadu, rep. By its Principal Secretary, Home (Transport IV) Department, Fort St. George,

¶11

Chennai – 9.

¶12

2.The Transport Commissioner,

¶13

Chepauk, Chennai – 5.

¶14

... Appellants

¶15

Vs.

¶16

1.S.Ramaligam 2.R.Suresh

¶17

3.K.Shanthi 4.M.S.Karunai Prakash

¶18

5.P.Pandian 6.K.Veeraputhiran

¶19

7.V.Loganayaki

¶20

... Respondents

¶21

Prayer : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent Act, praying

¶22

to set aside the order dated 23.08.2017 in W.P.No.31452 of 2014.

¶23

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

¶24

1/5

¶25

W.A.No.1317 of 2019

¶26

For Appellants : Mr.K.V.Sajeev Kumar Special Government Pleader For Respondents : Mr.K.Raja

¶27

JUDGMENT

¶28

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

¶29

This appeal has been directed against the order passed by the Writ Court dated 23.08.2017 in W.P.No.31452 of 2014.

¶30

The contesting respondents herein were working as Assistant in

¶31

the Transport Department and their next promotion avenue is Superintendent.

¶32

For having such promotion the experience / qualification

¶33

prescribed were sought to be relaxed as some similarly placed persons like the contesting respondents have been given the benefit, the same benefit is also sought for and in this regard they approached the Writ Court for filing the said writ petition seeking for writ of mandamus and to include them in the panel year 2014-2015 for promotion to the post of Superintendent.

¶34

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

¶35

2/5

¶36

W.A.No.1317 of 2019

¶37

Considering the said case projected by the contesting

¶38

respondents who stood as writ petitioners before the writ Court, the learned Judge by order dated 23.08.2017 allowed the said writ petition, as against which, this writ appeal has been directed.

¶39

Today when the writ appeal is taken up for hearing, Mr.K.V.Sajeev Kumar, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the appellants has submitted that, during the pendency of this writ appeal, having considered the order passed by the learned Single Judge, the Department i.e. the appellant having considered the promotions of the contesting respondents and similarly placed other persons numbering about 29 had issued proceedings on 20.06.2019, whereby, all the respondents herein except the 3^rd respondent had been considered and granted promotion by giving relaxation to the post of Superintendent for the panel year 2016-2017.

¶40

Insofar as the 3^rd respondent K.Shanthi is concerned, since she is

¶41

no more, the question of giving any promotion to her does not arise, he contended.

¶42

3/5

¶43

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

¶44

W.A.No.1317 of 2019

¶45

The said position cannot be controverted by the learned counsel

¶46

appearing for the contesting respondents.

¶47

In view of the above, where the prayer sought for in the writ

¶48

petition as has been allowed by the learned Judge since has been accomplished by virtue of the order of the appellant Department dated 20.06.2019, nothing could be pursuaded further in this writ appeal. In view of the same, we feel that this writ appeal can be disposed, accordingly it is disposed of by recording the aforesaid development. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶49

Index : Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No Sgl

¶50

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

¶51

4/5

¶52

W.A.No.1317 of 2019

¶53

R. SURESH KUMAR, J. And K.KUMARESH BABU, J.

Sgl

W.A.No.1317 of 2019

16.08.2023

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

¶58

5/5

The Government of Tamil Nadu v. S. Ramalingam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Government of Tamil Nadu v. S. Ramalingam

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

S.Bala Krishnan Vs the Union of India

The Government of Tamil Nadu Vs Arakonam Ethu Alai Anna Thozhilalar Sangam

M.Manoharan Vs the Director of Animal Husbandry and Medical Services

The Chairman Vs a. Moses Mohanraj

The State of Tamil Nadu Vs M. Padmavathi

The Commissioner Vs the Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu