VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2023 › High Court of Madras

S. Sakthivel Kumaran, v. The Govt. of Tamil Nadu,

WITHDRAWN DISMISSED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
28 November 2023
Bench
S.M. Subramaniamauthor, V. Lakshminarayanan
Case no.
WP(MD) 21058/2014

Judgment

ORDER (Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.) Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission of this Court to withdraw the Writ Petition and he has also made an endorsement to that effect. Recording the same, this Writ Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

(S.M.S.,J.) (V.L.N.,J.)

28.11.2023 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Lm To

1.The Principal Secretary, The Government of Tamil Nadu, Department of School Education, Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

2.The Director of School Education, D.P.I. Campus, College Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 006.

3.The District Educational Officer, Virudhunagar Educational District, Virudhunagar District. S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J. and V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN,J. Lm

28.11.2023

Case details

Parties and counsel

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 28.11.2023 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN and M.P.(MD).Nos.1 to 3 of 2014 and 1 of 2015 S.Sakthivel Kumaran .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The Government of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Department of School Education, Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009. 2.The Director of School Education, D.P.I. Campus, College Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 006. 3.The District Educational Officer, Virudhunagar Educational District, Virudhunagar District. .. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned G.O.Ms.No.2378, Education, dated 30.10.1981 issued by the 1st respondent and quash the same with regard to amending Rule 5 by inserting proviso to Rule 5 and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to post/appoint the petitioner to the post of Lab Assistant/Lab Attender within the time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.R.V.Rajkumar For Respondents : Mr.S.Kameswaran Government Advocate

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.