The court affirmed that eligibility for the Law Officer position does not require a regular law degree and dismissed repetitive litigation as abuse of process.

8. Balasubramanian.V, Account Officer, Madurai Corporation Zone No.3, Madurai 625 002. ... Respondents PRAYER :- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue of Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent No.5 to complete the enquiry and take action on the basis of the petitioner representation dated 01.06.2022 forwarded by the respondent No.3 through communication letter no. 10814/2022 MCA-1 dated 25.07.2022 within the time stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Alagumani For Respondents : Mr.J.Ashok for R1 to R3 Additional Government Pleader Mr.S.Vinayak for R4&R5 Mr.K.Govindarajan for R6 for Mr.T.Antony Arulraj Mr.S.Paul Murugesh for R8

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by J.NISHA BANU, J.)

This writ petition has been filed for a Mandamus to direct the respondent No.5 to complete the enquiry and take action on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 01.06.2022 forwarded by the respondent No.3 through communication letter No.10814/2022 MCA-1 dated 25.07.2022 within a time frame. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would state that originally, the 6^th respondent/Tmt.Sivapackiam was appointed as a Female Nursing Orderly in the Public Health Department of the Madurai Corporation in 1993. Later, she resigned the said post in 1994 and joined as Typist in the General Service Department of the Madurai Corporation. Thereafter, she was promoted as Assistant and then Superintendent. Pursuant to creation of the post of Law Officer vide G.O.No.76, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 12.05.1998, she was appointed as Law Officer on 12.01.2015. He would further state that the 6^th respondent has completed LLB three years degree course from Al Ameen Law College at Bangalore, Karnataka State from 1997 to 2000, without attending the college regularly and without even obtaining permission from his employer namely, Madurai Corporation and therefore she is not entitled to hold the post of Law Officer. Hence, the petitioner has filed this writ petition for the abovesaid relief.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the 6^th respondent would state that the present writ petition is the fourth round of litigation filed by the petitioner herein and despite unsuccessful attempts on thrice before this Court by filing W.P(MD)Nos.20251 of 2015, 4095 of 2019 and 15881 of 2021, the present writ petition has been filed. In the first writ petition namely, W.P(MD)No. 20251 of 2015, the Madurai Corporation has filed counter stating that though the 6^th respondent acquired LLB without getting permission, it was condoned and ratified by the Corporation and considering the fact that thereafter, the 6^th respondent acquired MCA and LLM after obtaining permission from the Corporation, she was appointed as Law Officer. The Writ Court also referring to the service rules of the Corporation, held that the candidate who is having law degree or equivalent degree would be eligible for appointment as Law Officer and there is no mention in the service rules that the candidate should have possessed law degree by regular course. Accordingly, the Writ Court dismissed the first writ petition.

4. The learned counsel for the 6^th respondent further submitted that the second writ petition namely, W.P(MD)No.4095 of 2019 filed on the same prayer, was dismissed by the Division Bench, holding that it would amount to reviewing the earlier decision of the Division Bench. The third writ petition namely, W.P(MD)No.15881 of 2021 was filed by the very same writ petitioner herein, seeking issuance of a Writ of Quo Warranto challenging the appointment of the 6^th respondent herein as Law Officer and the Writ Court citing the orders passed in the earlier two writ petitions, dismissed the third writ petition. However, the very same person h