Dismissed

B.Sarthar v. The District Collector

Madras HC24 Oct 2024WP/23518/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a direction to select petitioners as Village Assistants. The court held the prayer infructuous as the impugned notification was cancelled and a fresh one issued for appointment. Closed connected applications. (Thick order)

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions, if any, closed.

B.Sarthar Vs The District Collector — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.23518 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 24.10.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH

¶6

W.P.No.23518 of 2021 and W.M.P.No.24746 of 2021

¶7

1.B.Sarthar

¶8

2.A.Ranjithkumar

¶9

3.S.Manojkumar

¶10

... Petitioners

¶11

Vs.

¶12

1.The District Collector, Collector Office Building, No.7/1, State Bank Road, Gopalapuram, Coimbatore 641 018.

¶13

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer (south), Collector Office Building Compound, State Bank Road, Coimbatore 641 108.

¶14

3.The Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Sulur Main Road, Sulur, Coimbatore. ... Respondents

¶15

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to select the Village Assistant post to the petitioners in the light of the confirmation order passed on 24.02.2021.

¶16

Page 1 of 4

¶17

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

¶18

W.P.No.23518 of 2021

¶19

For Petitioners : Ms.D.Kowsalya for Mr.R.Thangamani For Respondents : Mr.R.U.Dinesh Raj Kumar, AGP

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

This Writ Petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents to

¶22

select the petitioners as Village Assistant in the light of the confirmation order passed on 24.02.2021.

¶23

When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that as the interview was not conducted in a proper manner as prescribed in G.O.No.574, dated 17.10.2020, the first respondent had cancelled the Notification in Ref. No.5118/2010/A1, dated 12.12.2020 and a fresh notification has been issued on 10.10.2022 for appointment of the Village Assistant in Sulur Taluk.

¶24

Since the Notification in Ref. No.5118/2010/A1, dated 12.12.2020, has been cancelled on 29.10.2021 and a fresh notification has been issued on 10.10.2022, nothing survives for adjudication in this petition. Therefore, the prayer sought in the present Writ Petition has become infructuous.

¶25

Page 2 of 4

¶26

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

¶27

W.P.No.23518 of 2021

¶28

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.

¶29

Connected Miscellaneous Petitions, if any shall stand closed.

¶30

24.10.2024

¶31

vkr

¶32

Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order Neutral Citation : Yes / No

¶33

¶34

1.The District Collector, Collector Office Building, No.7/1, State Bank Road, Gopalapuram, Coimbatore 641 018.

¶35

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer (south), Collector Office Building Compound, State Bank Road, Coimbatore 641 108.

¶36

3.The Tahsildar, Tahsildar Office, Sulur Main Road, Sulur, Coimbatore.

¶37

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

¶38

Page 3 of 4

¶39

W.P.No.23518 of 2021

¶40

VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.

¶41

vkr

¶42

W.P.No.23518 of 2021 and W.M.P.No.24746 of 2021

¶43

24.10.2024

¶44

Page 4 of 4

¶45

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

B.Sarthar v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Sarthar 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

K.Eswari Vs The Chief Education officer

C.Dharanivasan Vs The District Collector

C.Rathika Vs The Director General of Training

B.Shivadharmaraj Vs The Union of India

D.Balasubramaniam Vs The director

P. Gandhimathi Vs The Chief Educational officer