N.Elanchezhiyan, v. The Director of Elementary
Case brief
What is this about?
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to quash an order depriving him of increments. The High Court closed the petition as infructuous after learning that the respondents had paid the petitioner the increment and other eligible monetary benefits during the hearing.
What did the court decide?
The writ petition was closed as infructuous.
What the court decided
W.P.No.7027 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 14.02.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
W.P.No.7027 of 2017
N.Elanchezhiyan … Petitioner
Vs
- 1.The Director of Elementary Education, Directorate of Elementary Education, Chennai – 600 006.
- 2.The District Elementary Educational Officer, Office of the District Elementary Educational Officer, Thiruvannamalai, Thiruvannamalai District.
- 3.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Office of the Assistant District Elementary Educational Officer, Polur, Thiruvannamalai District.
- 4.The Additional Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Office of the Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Polur, Thiruvannamalai District.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition for quashing an order withholding increments should be continued after the respondent authorities paid the eligible benefits during the pendency of the petition.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
N. Elanchezhiyan
- respondent
The Director of Elementary Education
- respondent
The District Elementary Educational Officer
- respondent
The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer
- respondent
The Additional Assistant Elementary Educational Officer
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court