The High Court dismissed a writ appeal seeking promotion as Deputy Chief Mechanical Engineer because a fresh selection process was completed and appointments issued after the impugned order, rendering the appeal infructuous.
Writ appeal dismissed as infructuous; liberty granted to challenge the fresh selection process.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.A.No.902 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08.04.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. KUMARESH BABU W.A.No.902 of 2021
S.Viswanathan
... Appellant
Vs.
PRAYER : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 27.11.2020 passed by this Court in W.P.No.30413/2013, in so far as directing the respondents 1 to 4 to carry out the whole selection process once again instead of promoting the appellant as Deputy Chief Mechanical Engineer (Mechanical) with retrospective effect from
Page 1 of 4
W.A.No.902 of 2021
24.06.2013 with all attendant benefits.
For Appellant : Mr. K.Raja for Mr.T.S.Selvarani For Respondents : Mr.Arun Dhanapalan for Respondents 1 to 4 No appearance for R5. JUDGMENT
(Order of the Court was delivered by D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.)
Today, when the matter is listed for hearing, the learned counsel for
the appellant informed before this court that after passing of the order by the Writ Court, fresh selection process was commenced, candidates were selected and, appointment order was also issued to them. Inview of the above said further developments, the prayer sought for in the writ appeal has become infructous and nothing survives for further adjudication.
Page 2 of 4
W.A.No.902 of 2021
appointment order was also issued in favour of the selected candidates, the
writ appeal is dismissed as infructuous. However, liberty is granted to the
appellant to challenge the selection process, if permissible under law.
(D.K.K.J.) (K.B.J.)
08.04.2024
Internet: Yes/No Index : Yes/No mst
To
Page 3 of 4
W.A.No.902 of 2021
D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J. and K. KUMARESH BABU, J. mst
W.A.No.902 of 2021
08.04.2024
Page 4 of 4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ appeal praying for promotion and retrospective effect should be allowed when fresh selection has already been completed and appointments issued to others.
Whether liberty to challenge the selection process on its own merits should be granted.
S. Viswanathan
The Chairman, Chennai Port Trust
The Deputy Chairman, Chennai Port Trust
The Secretary, Chennai Port Trust
The Chief Mechanical Engineer, Chennai Port Trust
K. Mahalingam
D. Krishnakumar
K. Kumareswari Babu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
