Dismissed

Dr.S.Saravanan v. State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC4 Jan 2024WP/13785/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed the writ petition challenging an order appointing the third respondent as Principal. The court held the challenge became infructuous as subsequent government orders relieved the third respondent and appointed a senior professor to the post, rendering further adjudication unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition is dismissed as the prayer has become infructuous due to subsequent executive orders. The petitioner is at liberty to ventilate grievances regarding the subsequent orders.

Dr.S.Saravanan Vs State of Tamilnadu — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.13785 of 2017

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 04.01.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

¶6

W.P.No.13785 of 2017 and W.M.P.Nos.14980,14981 & 18988 of 2017

¶7

Dr.S.Saravanan ...Petitioner

¶8

vs.

¶9

1.State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Principal Secretary to Government, Health and Family Welfare Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George,

¶10

Chennai – 600 009.

¶11

2.The Additional Chief Secretary/ Commissioner, Commissionerate/ Directorate of Indian Medicine and Homeopathy, Arumbakkam, Chennai -106.

¶12

3.Dr.P.Rathamani ... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the 2^nd respondent in his proceedings Ref.No.2710/E1/1/2017 dated 28.04.2017 appointing the 3^rd respondent as the Principal In-charge of the Government Homeopathy Medical College and Hospital, Thirumangalam, Madurai and to quash the same as illegal and unsustainable in law and for a

¶14

1/10

¶15

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

¶16

W.P.No.13785 of 2017

¶17

consequential direction to the 2^nd respondent to appoint the petitioner herein as the Principal of the said college and pass such further orders.

¶18

For Petitioner : Ms.Kavitha Rameshwar

¶19

For RR1 & 2 : Mr.C.Sangamithirai Special Government Pleader

¶20

For R3 : Ms.D.Menakshi for Mr.S.Rajendiran

¶21

ORDER

¶22

This Writ petition has been filed challenging the order of the 2^nd

¶23

respondent in his proceedings Ref.No.2710/E1/1/2017 dated 28.04.2017 appointing the 3^rd respondent as the Principal In-charge of the Government Homeopathy Medical College and Hospital, Thirumangalam, Madurai and to quash the same as illegal and unsustainable in law and for a consequential direction to the 2^nd respondent to appoint the petitioner herein as the Principal of the said college

¶24

Heard Ms.Kavitha Rameshwar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.C.Sangamithirai, learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents 1 and 2 and Ms.D.Menakshi, learned counsel for Mr.S.Rajendiran, learned counsel for 3^rd respondent.

¶25

2/10

¶26

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

¶27

W.P.No.13785 of 2017

¶28

The case of the petitioner is that he has acquired the BHMS (Bachelor of Homeopathic Medicine and Surgery) Degree in November 1997 and registered with the Homeopathy Council and was appointed as a tutor in Vinayaga Mission Hospital, Salem and thereafter, served as a Lecturer at the Dr.Hahnemann Homeopathy Medical College. He was promoted as a Reader and worked till 2005. He completed MD Course in the year 2009 and worked as a Reader (In-charge Professor) and a PostGraduate Guide at the Saratha Krishna Homeopathy Medical College, Kulasekaram at Kanyakumari District from 2009 to 2012 and then as a Professor from 2012 to 2013. Thereafter, he was appointed as a Professor (Homeopathy) in the Government Homeopathy Medical College and Hospital, Thirumangalam, Madurai on 28.02.2014 and had been working as a Professor till date.

¶29

The grievance of the petitioner is that the 3^rd respondent who has

¶30

been given the additional charge of the post of Principal by the order of the 2^nd respondent dated 28.04.2017 did not possess even the essential

¶31

3/10

¶32

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

¶33

W.P.No.13785 of 2017

¶34

qualification as prescribed by the Central Council of Homeopathy Rules. As such the order dated 28.04.2017 of the 2^nd respondent, appointing the 3^rd respondent as Principal of the 3^rd respondent's college as additional in-charge is under challenge.

¶35

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 3^rd respondent did not possess the basic qualification required for appointment as Principal under the Recruitment Rules prescribed under the Central Rules of Homeopathy. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is the senior most Professor in the 3^rd respondent's College and as such appointing the 3^rd respondent by ignoring the petitioner who is fully qualified is against the Recruitment Rules and sought to set aside the order dated 28.04.2017 of the 2^nd respondent.

¶36

On behalf of the respondents 1 and 2, a counter has been filed.

¶37

Placing reliance on the counter affidavit, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 has considered the entire issue comprehensively in accordance with their relevant Rules and the

¶38

4/10

¶39

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

¶40

W.P.No.13785 of 2017

¶41

prayer which the petitioner sought in this Writ Petition has been complied with vide issuing order in G.O.Ms.No.255, Health and Family Welfare Department dated 19.07.2017 and Ref No.10658/E1/1/2011-2 dated 20.07.2017. For better appreciation, relevant paragraph 9 (iii) is extracted

¶42

hereunder:-

¶43

“ 9(iii) It is submitted that based on G.O.(Ms) No.255, Health and Family Welfare Department dated 19.04.2017, Dr.P.Rathamani, formerly Professor, Government Homeopathy Medical College, Thirumangalam, Madurai who has been formerly posted to hold the additional charge of the post of Principal, Government Homoeopathy Medical College, Thirumangalam, Madurai has been relieved from the post of Principal incharge and as well as from the post of Professor of the College. Dr.C.Jeyam, Professor of the College, being senior as per Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission Seniority has been posted to hold the full additional charge of the post of Principal, Government Homoeopathy Medical College, Thirumangalam, Madurai vide this Office under Ref.No.10658/E1/1/2011-2 dated 20.07.2017.”

¶44

It is clearly stated that in the place of 3^rd respondent/

¶45

5/10

¶46

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

¶47

W.P.No.13785 of 2017

¶48

Dr.P.Rathamani has been relieved from the additional charge of Principal incharge of Government Homeopathy Medical College, Thirumangalam, Madurai and one Dr.C.Jeyam, Professor of the College, being senior as per Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission Seniority has been posted to hold the full additional charge of the post of Principal, Government Homeopathy Medical College, Thirumangalam, Madurai. In view of the same, the learned Special Government Pleader would submit that nothing survives in this Writ Petition for further adjudication at present and sought for dismissing the Writ Petition.

¶49

I have heard the submissions made by the learned counsels

¶50

appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record before this Court.

¶51

On careful perusal of the material on record, it appears that in view of the order passed by the respondents 1 and 2 in G.O.Ms.No.255, Health and Family Welfare Department dated 19.07.2017 and a consequential order in Ref No.10658/E1/1/2011-2 dated 20.07.2017, the 3^rd

¶52

6/10

¶53

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

¶54

W.P.No.13785 of 2017

¶55

respondent has been relieved from the additional charge from the post of Principal, Government Homeopathy Medical College, Thirumangalam, Madurai and one Dr.C.Jeyam, Professor of the College, being senior as per Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission Seniority has been posted to hold the full additional charge ot the post of Principal, Government Homeopathy Medical College, Thirumangalam, Madurai.

¶56

In view of the same, in the considered opinion of this Court,

¶57

nothing survives in this Writ Petition for further adjudication and in the light of the G.O.Ms.No.255, Health and Family Welfare Department dated 19.07.2017, the prayer in this Writ Petition has become infructuous.

¶58

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to ventilate his grievances available under law, if he is fully aggrieved by the G.O.Ms.No.255, Health and Family Welfare Department dated 19.07.2017 and Ref No.10658/E1/1/2011-2 dated 20.07.2017 of the respondents 1 and 2. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶59

7/10

¶60

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

¶61

W.P.No.13785 of 2017

¶62

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

¶63

04.01.2024

¶64

¶65

1.State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Principal Secretary to Government, Health and Family Welfare Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶66

2.The Additional Chief Secretary/ Commissioner, Commissionerate/ Directorate of Indian Medicine and Homeopathy, Arumbakkam, Chennai -106.

¶67

8/10

¶68

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

¶69

W.P.No.13785 of 2017

¶70

BATTU DEVANAND, J.

¶71

GBA

¶72

W.P.No.13785 of 2017 and W.M.P.Nos.14980,14981 & 18988 of 2017

¶73

9/10

¶74

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

¶75

W.P.No.13785 of 2017

¶76

04.01.2024

¶77

10/10

¶78

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

Dr.S.Saravanan v. State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr.S.Saravanan 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

Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

R.Gopalakrishnan, Vs Government of Tamilnadu

C.R.Shanmugam Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

K.S.Vaidyanathan Vs The Secretary to Government

C.Ganesan Vs The Registrar of Cooperative

R.Mohanraj, Vs Joint Registrar of