Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
In view of the submission and the endorsement made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. R.Kamarasu...RespondentsPrayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned Report of Selection Committee dated 09.01.2018 selecting the 4th respondent based on the mark obtained…
Judgment
W.P.(MD).No.4349 of 2019 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED : 05.02.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN W.P(MD)No.4349 of 2019and W.M.P.(MD).Nos.3453 & 3454 of 2019Dr.G.Chandran...Petitioner-Vs-1. The Registrar, Tamil Unviersity, Thanjavur.
The Vice Chancellor, Tamil University, Thanjavur.
The Selection Committee, Tamil University, Thanjavur.
R.Kamarasu...RespondentsPrayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned Report of Selection Committee dated 09.01.2018 selecting the 4th respondent based on the mark obtained in ''Lexicography'' 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.4349 of 2019for notified the post of ''Foklore'', impugned Draft Agenda for Resolution of the Syndicate dated 09.01.2018 and consequential impugned order of the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.A1/01/2016-1 dated 06.07.2018, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 herein to appoint the petitioner herein in the post of Professor of Folklore in the Folklore Department, from the date of appointment of the fourth respondent herein with all arrears, monetary and service benefits to the petitioner. For petitioner : Mr.K.AppaduraiFor Respondent Nos.1 to 3: Mr.S.Sankarapandian for M/s.C.Arulvadivel AssociatesFor Respondent No.4: Mr.S.K.ManiORDERThis writ petition has been filed challenging the Report of Selection Committee dated 09.01.2018, selecting the 4th respondent based on the mark obtained in ''Lexicography'' for notified the post of ''Foklore'', impugned Draft Agenda for Resolution of the Syndicate dated 09.01.2018 and consequential impugned order of the second respondent dated 06.07.2018 and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 herein to appoint the petitioner herein in the post of Professor of Folklore in the Folklore Department.
Operative part
2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.4349 of 20192. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the writ petitioner has already retired from service. Therefore, the relief sought for in this writ petition has become infructuous and hence, the writ petition may be dismissed as infructuous. To the said effect, the learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner has also made an endorsement.3. In view of the submission and the endorsement made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 05.02.2025Index : Yes/NoSpeaking/Non-Speaking orderNeutral Citation : Yes/Nogvn3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.4349 of 2019M.JOTHIRAMAN,J. gvnTo 1. The Registrar, Tamil Unviersity, Thanjavur. 2. The Vice Chancellor, Tamil University, Thanjavur. 3. The Selection Committee, Tamil University, Thanjavur. W.P.(MD).No.4349 of 2019 05.02.20254/4
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In view of the submission and the endorsement made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous
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.