Back
2024 Supreme(Mad) 1085
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS, (MADURAI BENCH)
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
P. Vinayagam – Petitioner
Versus
The Principal Secretary/The State Project Director, Sarva Shiksha Abiyan (SSA), Chennai and Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(MD)Nos.18125 & 18126 of 2017 and W.M.P.[Md]Nos.14586 to 14591 of 2017
Decided On : 28-08-2024
For the Petitioners: Mr. G. Karthik for M/s.T.Lajapathy Roy & Associates.
For the Respondents:Mr. T. Amjad Khan, Government Advocate.
IMPORTANT POINT
Writ petitions become infructuous when the subject matter ceases to exist, leading to dismissal without further adjudication.
Headnote:
INFRUCTUOUS - WRIT PETITIONS - The court determined that the writ petitions filed by the petitioners had become infructuous due to their non-employment at the relevant school, leading to the conclusion that there was no longer a matter for adjudication. The court accepted the representation made by the Government Advocate regarding the petitioners' current employment status, resulting in the dismissal of the petitions without costs.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners filed writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash an advertisement and to allow them to continue in service as B.T. Assistants without the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) until March 31, 2019.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners were not currently employed at the school in question, rendering the petitions infructuous and unnecessary for further adjudication.
Issues: Whether the writ petitions could be adjudicated given the petitioners' current employment status.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that if the subject matter of the writ petitions no longer existed, the petitions must be dismissed as infructuous.
Result: The writ petitions were disposed of as infructuous, with no order as to costs.
ORDER :
(Abdul Quddhose, J.) :
(Common Prayer : Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for Writs of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned advertisement published in the Tamil Daily Dhinathanthi on 30.08.2017, on the file of the third respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the respondents to permit the petitioners to continue in service as B.T. Assistant (Science) and B.T. Assistant (Social Science), respectively up to 31st March, 2019 without TET, enabling the petitioners to acquire TET within such time.)
When these Writ Petitions were taken up for hearing, it was represented by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the official respondents that the petitioner are presently not working at Kasthurba Gandhi Baliga Vidyalaya Residential School, Ulagampatti, S.Pudur Union, Sivagangai District and therefore, nothing survives for further adjudication in this writ petition.
2. In view of the submission made by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the official respondents, it is clear that the prayers sought for have now become infructuous. Learned Counsel for the petitioners is also not aware of the same. But since the Writ Petitions are of the year 2017, the statement made by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the official respondents has to be accepted.
3. Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are disposed of as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
