Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J
Radhakrishnan – Appellant
Versus
The State of Tamilnadu – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court examines challenge against an appointment through a writ petition. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. insufficient challenge against the underlying appointment order. (Para 3) |
| 3. court's dismissal of the writ petition due to lack of merit. (Para 4) |
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 07.12.2019, issued by the respondent – Panchayat Union.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the appointment of the sixth respondent as Panchayat Secretary in the fifth respondent – Panchayat.
3. Even though the grievance of the petitioner is only against the sixth respondent, the impugned order dated 07.12.2019 does not refer to the sixth respondent. The impugned order only gives the details of the number of applicants, number of participants and number of absentees in the selection process. Only pursuant to the aforementioned selection process, the sixth respondent was appointed as Panchayat Secretary. The appointment order issued in favour of the sixth respondent has not been challenged. The petitioner has challenged the mere communication addressed to a person, by name, D.Sethu, dated 07.12.2019, who is not a party to this writ petition. When the petitioner
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
