Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
S. Palamuthirsolai – Petitioner
Versus
The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Health Department – Respondent
W.P. (MD) Nos. 11383 to 11387 of 2017, W.M.P. (MD) Nos. 8759 to 8768 of 2017
Decided On : 08-08-2024
Writ Petition - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - The court dismissed the writ petitions as infructuous, acknowledging the petitioners' counsel's submission that the matters no longer required adjudication, thereby upholding the principle that courts should not entertain cases that have lost their relevance or necessity for resolution.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking to quash a notification regarding the appointment of an orthopedics technician and to direct the issuance of a fresh notification based on seniority.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted that the counsel for the petitioners indicated that the writ petitions had become infructuous, leading to the dismissal of the petitions without further examination of the merits.
Issues: Whether the writ petitions should be dismissed as infructuous based on the petitioners' counsel's endorsement.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that it is appropriate to dismiss cases that no longer require judicial intervention, reflecting the principle of judicial economy.
Result: The writ petitions were dismissed as infructuous, with no order as to costs, and connected miscellaneous petitions were also closed.
ORDER :
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to order passed by the second respondent in Notification No. 04/MRB/2017 dated 08.05.2017 and quash the same and consequently directing the second respondent to issue fresh notification by following seniority for the post of orthopedics Technician.
1. The learned Counsel for the respective petitioners submits that these Writ Petitions have now become infructuous. He has also made an endorsement to that effect in the Court bundle.
2. Recording the same, these Writ Petitions are dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
A writ petition under Article 226 becomes infructuous when the relief sought is no longer relevant or necessary.
Legal proceedings must address current and relevant issues; if an issue becomes moot, the court will dismiss the case.
A writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable if the relief sought has become infructuous.
A writ petition can be dismissed for non-prosecution if the petitioner fails to appear and show interest in the case.
A writ petition becomes infructuous when the relief sought is no longer relevant or actionable.
The court has the discretion to dispose of a writ petition as infructuous based on the submissions made by the petitioner's counsel.
A writ petition abates upon the death of the petitioner if legal heirs are not substituted, reflecting the importance of procedural compliance in legal proceedings.
A writ petition is rendered infructuous when the circumstances surrounding the request for relief change, making it impossible to grant the requested relief.
A writ petition under Article 226 becomes infructuous when the relief sought has already been granted, negating the need for judicial intervention.
A writ petition becomes infructuous when the relief sought is no longer necessary due to subsequent developments, such as a promotion.
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
