BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Abdul Quddhose, J.
M.Muthuganesan - Petitioner
Vs.
The Additional Chief Secretary/State Tax Commissioner, Chepauk, Chennai - Respondent
W.P.(MD)No.27230 of 2019
Decided On : 30-08-2024
Writ Petition - Employment Selection Process - The court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous due to the stalling of the selection process for the Office Assistant position, which was caused by a government reorganization order that eliminated vacancies in the relevant district, thus rendering the petitioner's request for consideration moot.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to consider their candidature for the Office Assistant position, referencing a prior court order.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the selection process had been stalled due to a government reorganization order, which resulted in no vacancies for the Office Assistant position, making the petition moot.
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to consideration for the Office Assistant position despite the stalling of the selection process due to a government reorganization.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the inability to appoint new Office Assistants due to the lack of vacancies, as a result of the government reorganization, rendered the petition infructuous.
Result: The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous, with no order as to costs.
ORDER :
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the second and third respondents to consider the petitioner's candidature in the selection process for the post of Office Assistant in the third respondent office in view of the order passed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.(MD)No. 22133 of 2018 dated 31.10.2018 and thereby appoint the petitioner as Office Assistant in the third respondent office by considering the representation given by the petitioner dated 28.01.2019 within the period stipulated by this Court.
In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, it has been stated that the selection process which is the subject matter of this writ petition has been stalled and the relevant paragraphs of the counter affidavit reads thus:
7. .....
8. I respectfully state that the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.30, Commercial Taxes and Registration (A2) Department dated 04.03.2019 were implemented from 01.06.2019 giving effect to reorganization and as a result of the reorganization, the excess Office Assistants in Sivagangai, Dindigul, Madurai (West – CT District) were posted in the vacant places in Madurai (East – CT District) and as such as there is no vacancy in cadre of Office Assistant Post as of now. In view of this fact, the question of appointing new Office Assistants in Madurai (East – CT District) does not arise and therefore it is submitted that the respondents was disabled to comply with the order of the Hon'ble Court in W.P.(MD)No.22133 of 2018 dated 31.10.2018.”
2. In view of the fact that the selection process which is subject matter of this writ petition has been stalled by the respondents as seen from paragraph Nos.6 & 8 of the counter affidavit filed by the third respondent, which is extracted supra, the prayer sought for in this writ petition has now become infructuous.
3. Recording the same, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.
A writ petition seeking appointment can be dismissed as infructuous if the underlying selection process is stalled due to external factors, such as government reorganization that eliminates vacancies....
The recruitment process must ensure equal treatment of all candidates, upholding constitutional principles of fairness and non-discrimination.
A writ petition can be dismissed for non-prosecution if the petitioner shows a lack of interest in pursuing the case.
The court considered the principle of timeliness and finality in the context of providing additional marks for selection, especially after the completion of the selection process and the filling of a....
The completion of the selection process and the legal impermissibility of accommodating a candidate after a significant delay.
The appointing authority should provide legally acceptable justifiable reasons for non-appointment of candidates in the waiting list, and the inaction in filling up vacant posts without justifiable r....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.