N. Priyadarshini vs The Secretary to Government & Another

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2005 Supreme(Mad) 930

MARKANDEY KATJU, FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA
N. Priyadarshini – Appellant
Versus
The Secretary to Government & Another – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:For The Petitioner:K.M.Vijayan, Senior Counsel for M/s.Law Law, Mr.R.Gandhi, Senior Counsel for M/s.V.P.Sengottuvel, Mr.C.Selvaraju, Senior Counsel for M/s.S.Mani, Mrs.Nalini Chidambaram, Senior Counsel for M/s.Gladys Daniel, Mr.T.R.Rajagopalan, Senior Counsel for M/s.R.Sankarasubbu, Mr.C.Chinnasamy, Senior Counsel for M/s.Haja Mohideen Kisthi,, Mr.Arvind P.Datar Senior Counsel for M/s.K.Ramasamy, Mr.Vijay Narayan, Senior Counsel for M/s.R.Parthiban, Mr.P.S.Raman, Senior Counsel for M/s.P.R.Raman, Mr.P.Jayaraman, Senior Counsel for Mr.G.Thangavel, Mr.N.Paul Vasantha Kumar, Mr.K.Selvaraj, Advocates. For The Respondents:P.P.Rao, Senior Counsel Assisted by Mr.V.Karthikeyan, Addl.Govt.Pleader; Mr.N.R.Chandran, Advocate General Assisted by Mr.V.Raghupathy, Govt.Pleader; Mr.A.L.Somayaji, Addl.Advocate General Assisted by Mr.D.Krishnakumar, Spl.Govt.Pleader ; Mr.G.Masilamani, Senior Counsel, for M/s.G.M.Mani Associates (for Anna University); Mr.R.Krishnamoorthy, Senior Counsel for Mr.V.Ayyathurai, R.Thiagarajan, Senior Counsel for M/s.K.Balu, Advocate.

Judgment :-

Markandey Katju, CJ.

This writ petition and the connected writ petitions involve a common question of law, i.e., the validity of G.O.Ms.No. 184 Higher Education (J2) Department, dated 09.06.2005 abolishing the Tamil Nadu Professional Courses Common Entrance Examination 2005 and discontinuation of the improvement exam for admission to professional colleges in the State of Tamil Nadu for the academic year 2005-2006. Since common questions of law and fact are involved, we have heard all the cases together, and are disposing them off by this common judgment.

2. In W.P.No.18801 of 2005, N.Priyadarshini v. The Secretary to Government, Education Department, Fort.St.George, Chennai 9 and another (which we are treating as the leading case), it has been alleged in paragraph 3 of the affidavit filed in support of the petition that the writ petitioner undertook the plus 2 (class 12) examination from the State Board in March 2003 at Rasipuram, Namakkal District and secured qualifying marks. The petitioner took the plus 2 course improvement examination in the month of March 2004 and secured the following marks:-

â€œ Biology -- 200/200

Physics -- 198/200

Chemistry -- 198/200â€

3. It is fur

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2005 Supreme(Mad) 930

MARKANDEY KATJU, FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLAN. Priyadarshini – AppellantVersusThe Secretary to Government & Another – Respondent

MARKANDEY KATJU, FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA
N. Priyadarshini – Appellant
Versus
The Secretary to Government & Another – Respondent