Dismissed

R.Veerappan v. The District Collector

Madras HC7 Sept 2023WP/19131/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed under Article 226 seeking a direction to officials to conduct fresh recruitment calls and assign separate reservation numbers for taluk units. The petition was dismissed as infructuous because the village assistant posts had already been filled and appointed by the respondents, making the relief sought no longer necessary.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed with no costs; the consequent miscellaneous petition was closed.

R.Veerappan Vs The District Collector — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P No.19131 of 2017

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 07.09.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

¶6

W.P.No.19131 of 2017 And

¶7

W.M.P.No. 20638 of 2017

R.Veerappan

... Petitioner

-Vs-

The District Collector Ariyalur District, Ariyalur – 621 704.

¶12

The Revenue Divisional Officer Revenue Divisional Office, Udayarpalayam, Ariyalur District, Tamil Nadu – 621 804.

¶13

The Tahsildar Udayarpalayam Taluk at Jayankondam Ariyalur District, Tamil Nadu – 621 801.

¶14

The Tahsildar

¶15

Page 1 of 5

¶16

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

¶17

W.P No.19131 of 2017

¶18

Andimadam Taluk, Andimadam Ariyalur District, Tamil Nadu – 621 801. ... Respondents

¶19

PRAYER : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus directing the third and fourth respondents to make fresh call for application separately in respect of their own separate taluk units and to assign separate communal reservation roaster numbers for their taluks respectively and to select the candidates for the post of village assistants in their own taluk units and to follow the procedure laid down in G.O.Ms.No. 52 Revenue Department dated 17.06.1998.

¶20

¶21

For Petitioner : No appearance For Respondents : Mr. T.K.Saravanan Government Advocate

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of Certiorarified Mandamus seeking a direction to the third and fourth respondents to make a fresh call for application separately in respect of their own separate taluk units and to assign separate communal reservation roster numbers for their

¶24

Page 2 of 5

¶25

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

¶26

W.P No.19131 of 2017

¶27

taluks respectively and to select the candidates for the post of village assistants in their own taluk units and to follow the procedure laid down in G.O.Ms.No. 52 Revenue Department dated 17.06.1998.

¶28

2. There was no representation on behalf of the petitioner on the

¶29

earlier hearing date, namely 28.07.2023.

¶30

3. This Court had passed the following order:-

¶31

“No representation for petitioner. If the learned counsel is again not present, on the basis of records, orders shall be passed. List on 07.09.2023.”

¶32

4. It is today stated now on the side of the respondents that 16 individuals have been appointed as Village Assistants and they are also functioning as on date.

¶33

In view of that particular fact, the relief sought in the Writ Petition has become infructuous and more over the counsel is also absent.

¶34

6 . Hence, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.

¶35

Page 3 of 5

¶36

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

¶37

W.P No.19131 of 2017

¶38

Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶39

vsg

¶40

07.09.2023

¶41

Index:Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes/No To

¶42

The District Collector Ariyalur District, Ariyalur – 621 704.

¶43

The Revenue Divisional Officer Revenue Divisional Office, Udayarpalayam, Ariyalur District, Tamil Nadu – 621 804.

¶44

The Tahsildar Udayarpalayam Taluk at Jayankondam Ariyalur District, Tamil Nadu – 621 801.

¶45

The Tahsildar Andimadam Taluk, Andimadam Ariyalur District, Tamil Nadu – 621 801.

¶46

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN ,J.

¶47

vsg

¶48

Page 4 of 5

¶49

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

¶50

W.P No.19131 of 2017

¶51

W.P.No.19131 of 2017 And W.M.P.No. 20638 of 2017

¶52

07.09.2023

¶53

Page 5 of 5

¶54

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

R.Veerappan v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Veerappan v. The District Collector

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

Ramesh Yadav, Vs The Union of India

A.Mary Pauline Sarguunavathy Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

S.Sigamani Vs Kumar Jayanathan,I.a.S.

Jangathe Vinod Maroti Vs The Union of India

S.Gomathiammal Vs Government of Tamil Nadu

S.Muthukumaravel Vs The Secretary to Government