Petitioner filed a writ petition seeking cancellation of another individual's appointment as a teacher. The Court dismissed the petition, holding that service jurisprudence differs from PIL and requires the petitioner to demonstrate personal grievance and locus standi. The Court found no merit in the prayer for canceling another's appointment.
No costs.
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.
Writ Petition No.24218 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27.08.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
Writ Petition No.24218 of 2024
V.Rajkumar
... Petitioner
Vs.
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of declaration declaring the 4th respondent to cancel the appointment of the 6th respondent as null and void as he was
1/4
Writ Petition No.24218 of 2024
06.03.2023.
appointed as teacher based on the petitioner representation dated 06.03.2023.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Selvam For Respondents : Mrs.S.Mythreye Chandru Special Government Pleader for R1 to R5
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed to direct the 4 th
respondent to cancel the appointment of the 6 th respondent based on the
representation made by the petitioner on 06.03.2023.
petitioner and Mrs.S.Mythreye Chandru, learned Special Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 5.
vendatta in view of a fight going on between the petitioner and the 6th respondent. The petitioner seems to have obtained some information through RTI against the 6th respondent and consequent upon the same, the petitioner wants action to be taken against the 6th respondent by the 4th
respondent. The representation made by the petitioner did not evoke any
2/4
Writ Petition No.24218 of 2024
Court.
response and hence, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court.
4. In the considered view of this Court, service
Jurisprudence cannot be dealt with like some Public Interest Litigation.
The petitioner has to necessarily show his locus standi and also the personal grievance suffered by the petitioner. In the absence of the same, this Court cannot mechanically direct the official respondents to dispose of the representation made by some 3rd party.
and accordingly, the same stands dismissed. No costs.
27.08.2024
Neutral Citation: Yes/No Index: yes/no Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order rka
3/4
Writ Petition No.24218 of 2024
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J
rka
To
Writ Petition No.24218 of 2024
27.08.2024
4/4
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Court can direct official respondents to dispose of a representation made by a third party given the petitioner has shown locus standi.
Whether service jurisprudence can be dealt with as Public Interest Litigation where the claim is purely personal grievance.
Whether there is merit in a writ petition filed to cancel the appointment of a third party based on an RTI.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
V. Rajkumar
The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By its Secretary, Department of School Education
The Director of school Education
The Joint Director of School education (Personnel)
The Chief Educational Officer, Dharmapuri District
The District Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation
N. Anand Venkatesh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
