Dismissed¶32

Government of Tamilnadu v. T. Jagannathan

Madras HC2 Jan 2026WP/27170/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court; W.P.No. 27170 of 2007; certiorari under Article 226 against Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal order (O.A.No. 5231 of 1993 dated 14.02.1994); State's review application against batch orders dismissed by Tribunal; original order allowing S.Kalyani and 49 others left unchallenged; writ petition dismissed, no costs; connected M.P.No. 2 of 2007 closed.

What did the court decide?

Since no challenge had been laid against the original order of the Tribunal allowing the case of S.Kalyani and 49 others, the court was not inclined to consider the challenge to the dismissal of the review applications, and accordingly dismissed the writ petition. ¶32

Government of Tamilnadu Vs T. Jagannathan — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

W.P.No. 27170 of 2007.

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 02.01.2026

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH and

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

¶7

W.P.No. 27170 of 2007

¶8

and

¶9

M.P.No. 2 of 2007

¶10

1.Government of Tamil Nadu rep. By its Secretary to Govt. Education Department, Fort St.George, Madras – 9.

¶11

2.The Chief Educational Officer, Thallakulam, Madurai

¶12

(Now Designated as Chief Educational Officer, Theni).

¶13

3.The Headmaster, Victoria Memorial Higher Secondary School, Periyakulam.

.. Petitioners

1.T.Jaganathan

2.The Registrar, Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Chennai – 600 104.

¶18

.. Respondents

¶19

1/4

¶20

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

¶21

W.P.No. 27170 of 2007. Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

¶22

praying to issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records of the 2^nd respondent herein relating to the order passed by the Hon’ble Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No. 5231 of 1993 dated 14.02.1994 and quash the same.

¶23

For Petitioners : Mr.J.C.Durairaj Additional Government Pleader

¶24

For Respondents : No appearance for R1 R2 - Tribunal

¶25

ORDER

¶26

(Made by Dr. ANITA SUMANTH, J.)

¶27

We have heard Mr.Durairaj, learned Additional Government Pleader, appearing for petitioner. There is no appearance for R1 despite description being printed in the cause list. R2 is the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal (TAT/Tribunal).

¶28

The present petition has been filed challenging the order of the Tribunal dismissing the review application filed by the State in relation to the order passed in a batch of matters, wherein the Tribunal had allowed the applications.

¶29

Mr.Durairaj would fairly submit that no challenge has been laid

¶30

2/4

¶31

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

¶32

W.P.No. 27170 of 2007. as against the original order of the Tribunal allowing the case of S.Kalyani and 49 others and in such circumstances, we are not inclined to consider the challenge to the dismissal of review applications. Hence this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶33

[A.S.M, J.] [P.D.B, J.] 02.01.2026

¶34

Index:Yes/No Neutral Citation:Yes/No ssm

¶35

¶36

The Registrar, Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Chennai – 600 104.

¶37

3/4

¶38

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

¶39