Disposed¶33

I.Naveenkumar (22102036) v. The Directorate of Technical Education

Madras HC2 Mar 2026WP(MD)/2292/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of as infructuous, with no costs; the petitioner had already been readmitted to the 6th semester pursuant to the Court's interim direction dated 26.02.2026. ¶33

I.Naveenkumar (22102036) Vs The Directorate of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.2292 of 2026

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 02.03.2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶6

Writ Petition(MD)No.2292 of 2026

¶7

I Naveenkumar (22102036) Department of AI & DS, Rathinam Technical Campus, Coimbatore.

¶8

Residential Address I.Naveenkumar S/o Ilaiyaraja 3/336, Mariammankovil Street, Valantharavai, Ramanathapuram Taluk and District.

¶9

.. Petitioner

¶10

¶11

1.The Directorate of Technical Education, No.53, Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Chennai – 600 025.

¶12

2.The Controller of Examinations (B.E., & B.Tech), Anna University, Guindy, Chennai.

¶13

3.The Principal Rathinam Technical Campus, Eachanari, Coimbatore.

¶14

..Respondents

¶15

1/4

¶16

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

¶17

W.P(MD)No.2292 of 2026

¶18

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents and in more particularly to direct the 3^rd respondent to permit the petitioner to rejoin and pursue his B.Tech course from 6^th semester onwards till completion of 8^th semester.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Murugan

¶20

For Respondent : Mr.N.Ramesh Arumugam

¶21

Govt. Advocate for R1

¶22

M/s Jasmia Yasmin for R2 Mr.Lakshminarayanan for R3

¶23

ORDER

¶24

The petitioner is before this Court, seeking the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the third respondent to permit the petitioner to rejoin and pursue the B.Tech course from the 6th semester onwards, till the completion of the 8th semester.

¶25

This Court, vide order dated 26.02.2026, had directed the

¶26

third respondent to forward the application to the first respondent, and as a special case, the first respondent was directed to consider the said application and pass orders forthwith.

¶27