Dismissed

K.Jayakumar v. State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC6 Nov 2024WA/2790/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras heard Writ Appeals filed by Special Officers of Annamalai University against show cause notices. Acknowledging that the status of identical cases heard previously was unclear, the Court decided to pass a uniform order. It upheld the challenge to the notices, dismissed the appeals, but granted liberty to file objections within two weeks. The University is directed to hear t

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file reply/written objections within two weeks; University to hear appellants and pass orders within six weeks of receipt. Connecteds dismissed.

K.Jayakumar Vs State of Tamilnadu — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

2024:MHC:3782

¶2

W.A.Nos.2790 of 2019 etc.

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶4

DATED: 06.11.2024

¶5

CORAM :

¶6

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G. ARUL MURUGAN

¶7

W.A.Nos.2790, 2800, 2801, 2802, 2803 and 2804 of 2019 and CMP Nos.17880, 17884, 17891, 17893, 17894, 17900, 17902, 17839, 17879, 17842, 17885 and 17890 of 2019

¶8

W.A.No.2790 of 2019:

K.Jayakumar

.. Appellant

State of Tamilnadu,

¶13

rep. by its Secretary to Government,

¶14

Department of Higher Education,

¶15

Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶16

The Vice Chancellor,

¶17

The Syndicate of Annamalai University,

¶18

Rep. by its Chairman,

¶19

Annamalai University, Annamalai Nagar,

¶20

Cuddalore District – 608 002.

¶21

Annamalai University,

¶22

rep. by its Registrar,

¶23

Annamalai Nagar,

¶24

Cuddalore District – 608 002.

¶25

Thiru.Arumugam,

¶26

Registrar In-charge,

¶27

Annamalai University, Annamalai Nagar,

¶28

Cuddalore District – 608 002.

¶29

.. Respondents

¶30

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

¶31

¶32

W.A.Nos.2790 of 2019 etc.

¶33

PRAYER : APPEAL filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent Appeal against order dated 05.03.2019 made in W.P.No.25477 of 2018 on the file of this Court.

¶34

In all W.As For Appellant : Ms.Nandhini H. for Mr.V.Ajoy Khose For Respondents : Ms.V.Yamunadevi Special Government Pleader - R1

¶35

C O M M O N J U D G M E N T

¶36

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by Dr.ANITA SUMANTH.,J)

¶37

Ms.Nandhini, learned counsel for the appellants would submit that

¶38

these matters were all part of a batch of Writ Appeals filed by identically placed persons all working in the Annamalai University in the post of Special Officers (Grade I/Liaison Officers).

¶39

Vide order dated 30.09.2021, a Division Bench of this Court has considered the challenge to show cause notices as impugned in these appeals and after a detailed hearing has dismissed the Writ Appeals considering that the challenge was only to a show cause notice. The appellants were permitted to submit their objections to the show cause notice within a period of two weeks, if not already submitted and the University was directed to address the same and pass orders as expeditiously as possible.

¶40

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

¶41

¶42

W.A.Nos.2790 of 2019 etc.

¶43

Neither learned counsel is able to apprise us as to the fate of the

¶44

proceedings in the case of other appellants whose case were heard under order dated 30.09.2021. Therefore, we do not have the benefit of the stage of the matter as on date.

¶45

Be that as it may, in the interests of uniformity, and considering

¶46

the position that the appellants are all facing identical proceedings and are identically placed as well, the same order is taken to be passed in the present appeals.

¶47

The challenge to the impugned show cause notices is upheld and

¶48

these Writ Appeals are dismissed. However, the appellants are given liberty to file their reply/written objections to the impugned show cause notice, if not already filed, within a period of two (2) weeks from today.

¶49

Upon receipt of such reply/written objection, the University shall hear the appellants and pass orders within a period of six (6) weeks

¶50

from date of receipt of such objections, in accordance with law. No costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petitions are also dismissed.

¶51

sl Index:Yes/No Speaking order Neutral Citation:Yes

¶52

[A.S.M., J] [G.A.M., J] 06.11.2024

¶53

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

¶54

¶55

W.A.Nos.2790 of 2019 etc.

¶56

Dr.ANITA SUMANTH,J. AND G.ARUL MURUGAN,J.

¶57

¶58

¶59

State of Tamilnadu, rep. by its Secretary to Government, Department of Higher Education, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶60

The Vice Chancellor, The Syndicate of Annamalai University, Rep. by its Chairman, Annamalai University, Annamalai Nagar, Cuddalore District – 608 002.

¶61

Annamalai University, rep. by its Registrar, Annamalai Nagar, Cuddalore District – 608 002.

¶62

W.A.Nos.2790, 2800, 2801, 2802, 2803 and 2804 of 2019 and CMP Nos.17880, 17884, 17891, 17893, 17894, 17900, 17902, 17839, 17879, 17842, 17885 and 17890 of 2019

¶63

06.11.2024

¶64

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

¶65

K.Jayakumar v. State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Jayakumar v. State of Tamilnadu

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

Commissioner of Income Tax-I Vs M/S Tamil Nadu Newsprint and

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Apollo Hospitals Enterprises

Tvl. Mutha Marketing Agency, Vs the Commercial Tax Officer

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Shri K.Senthamilselvan

Thangam Hospital Vs Assistant Commissioner of

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Pioneer Miyagi Chemicals