Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- M DHANDAPANI
Outcome
Disposed of
The writ petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. The Secretary, Dr.Zakir Husain College, Illayangudi, Sivagangai District. ... RespondentsPrayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to approve the appointment of the petitioner as Store Keeper made by…
Judgment
W.P.No.2988 of 2026IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 30.01.2026CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANIW.P.No.2988 of 2026 P.H.Mohamed Irfan ... Petitioner Vs.
The Government of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the Principal Secretary, Higher Education Department, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.
The Commissioner of Collegiate Education, I.A.S.E.Campus, 577, Anna Salai, Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015.
The Regional Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Madurai Region, Madurai.
The Secretary, Dr.Zakir Husain College, Illayangudi, Sivagangai District. ... RespondentsPrayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to approve the appointment of the petitioner as Store Keeper made by the fourth 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.2988 of 2026respondent College w.e.f. 01.09.2025 in the sanctioned retirement vacancies and to disburse the salary and arrears of salary and all other benefits with effect from their date of appointment. For Petitioner : Mr.E.Martin Jaya KumarFor Respondents : Mr.M.R.Gokul Krishnan for R1 to R3 Additional Government PleaderO R D E RThe petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to approve the appointment of the petitioner as Store Keeper made by the fourth respondent College w.e.f. 01.09.2025 in the sanctioned retirement vacancy and to disburse the salary and arrears of salary and all other benefits with effect from the date of appointment.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was appointed by the fourth respondent as Store Keeper vide order dated 25.08.2025 with effect from 01.09.2025 in the sanctioned retirement vacancy and the fourth respondent forwarded a proposal dated 05.12.2025 to the third respondent for approval of the petitioner’s appointment, however, the same has not 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.2988 of 2026yet been considered by the third respondent. Hence, this Court may without going into the merits of the case, issue direction to the third respondent to consider the proposal forwarded by the fourth respondent on 05.12.2025 and to pass appropriate orders, within a reasonable time frame. 3. Considering the limited relief now sought for by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, directs the third respondent to consider the proposal forwarded by the fourth respondent on 05.12.2025, on merits and in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Operative part
4. The writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 30.01.2026priIndex: Yes/ No Speaking Order: Yes/ No NCC: Yes/ No 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.2988 of 2026M.DHANDAPANI,J. priTo1.The Principal Secretary, Higher Education Department, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.2.The Commissioner of Collegiate Education, I.A.S.E.Campus, 577, Anna Salai, Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015.3.The Regional Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Madurai Region, Madurai. 4. The Secretary, Dr.Zakir Husain College, Illayangudi, Sivagangai District.W.P.No.2988 of 202630.01.20264/4
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The writ petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.