The court held that the writ petition concerning appointment of displaced persons became infructuous after petitioners secured appointment following an interim order. The petition was dismissed accordingly.
The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous.
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.
THE HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN
Writ Petition No.20481 of 2010
ORDER:
Sri M.Balaji, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the writ petition was filed by the petitioners, as respondents were not considering their cases for appointment to any suitable posts reserved for displaced persons under G.O.Ms.NO.98 dated 15.04.1996; pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court on 18.08.2010, the petitioners’ cases were considered in terms of the G.O and they were appointed in service; and that the cause in the writ petition does not survive necessitating any further orders to be passed by this Court.
The Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed as infructuous. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
_________________________________ (RAMESH RANGANATHAN, ACJ) 11th November 2016 JSU
THE HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN
Writ Petition No.20481 of 2010
Date: 11.11.2016
JSU
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition survives now that petitioners were appointed as per the interim order and G.O.Ms.NO.98 dated 15.04.1996.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner(s)
Respondent(s)
RAMESH RANGANATHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
