Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Abdul Quddhose, J.
M.Vijayakumar - Petitioner
Versus
The Government of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Secretary to Government, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department and ors. – Respondents
W.P.(MD)No.21507 of 2019 and W.M.P.(MD)No.18168 of 2019
Decided On : 16-08-2024
Writ Petition - Employment Reservation - The court addressed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India concerning the inclusion of a backlog vacancy for an Assistant Professor of Sociology reserved for Scheduled Caste Arunthathiyar. The petitioner sought to quash a notification and include the vacancy in question. However, the petition was dismissed as withdrawn, indicating that the legal provisions regarding employment reservations were not further contested in this instance.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to quash a notification regarding the appointment of an Assistant Professor in the Sociology Department and to include a backlog vacancy reserved for Scheduled Caste Arunthathiyar.
Finding of the Court:
The court acknowledged the petitioner's request for withdrawal and recorded the same, leading to the dismissal of the writ petition without further examination of the merits.
Issues: Whether the backlog vacancy for the Assistant Professor position reserved for Scheduled Caste Arunthathiyar should be included in the notification and whether the notification should be quashed.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision to dismiss the petition as withdrawn indicates that the legal issues regarding the reservation and appointment process were not adjudicated, leaving the existing notification intact.
Result: The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn, with no order as to costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
ORDER :
Abdul Quddhose, J.
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the second respondent's notification No.H2/13677/2019 dated 08.07.2019 as far as Item No.9, Sociology Department Assistant Professor post is concerned quash the same, consequently directing the second respondent to include the backlog vacancy of one Assistant Professor of Sociology which was reserved to Scheduled Caste Arunthathiyar in Notification No.35036/H2/2012 dated 22.08.2012.
The learned Counsel for the petitioner has addressed a letter to the Registry dated 12.08.2024 seeking for listing of the matter 'for withdrawal'. The said letter is taken on record.
2. Recording the same, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
The dismissal of the writ petition as withdrawn reflects the procedural aspect of legal challenges regarding employment reservations under the Constitution of India, without addressing the substantiv....
A writ petition becomes infructuous when the circumstances change post-filing, such as the retirement of the challenged party and the promotion of the petitioner.
Legal proceedings must address current and relevant issues; if an issue becomes moot, the court will dismiss the case.
A writ petition becomes infructuous when the relief sought is no longer necessary due to subsequent developments, such as a promotion.
A writ petition can be dismissed for non-prosecution if the petitioner fails to appear and show interest in the proceedings.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
