A previously adjudicated issue cannot be raised again without new evidence, especially regarding expert opinions on backlog vacancies.

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records in connection with the impugned committee report issued by the sixth respondent bearing reference No.R3/15102/2022, dated 18.08.2022, and quash the same and further direct the 1st and 2nd respondents herein to constitute a independent committee to identify the backlog vacancies in accordance with the G.O.Ms.No.91, dated 28.11.2001 in all category of posts, wherever reservation is applicable.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Krishnamoorthy For Respondents : Mr.M.R.Gokul Krishnan for R1, R2 Additional Government Pleader Mr.R.Sivakumar for R3, R4, R7 for M/s.S.Manikandan R5, R6 – No Appearance

O R D E R

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records in connection with the committee report issued by the sixth respondent bearing reference No.R3/15102/2022, dated 18.08.2022, and quash the same and further direct the respondents 1 and 2 to constitute an independent committee to identify the backlog vacancies in accordance with the G.O.Ms.No.91, dated 28.11.2001 in all category of posts, wherever reservation is applicable.

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the Founder of Tamil Nadu Agricultural University SC/ST Employees’ Welfare Association and Professor (Agronomy) in the Department of Crop Management, Agricultural College and Research Institute. As per the information furnished under the Right to Information Act, there were 67 backlog vacancies. Subsequently, the fourth respondent without any approval from the Court, suo motu formed a committee, namely, the fifth respondent, in the year 2020 and a report was submitted that the backlog vacancies were 54. Thereafter the sixth respondent committee was constituted on 18.08.2022, and submitted the impugned report, dated 26.08.2022 stating that backlog vacancies for SC/ST are 6. Such report dated

26.08.2022 is contrary to Articles 16(4-A), 16(4-B) and 335, Part XVI of the Constitution of India.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further submitted that this Court may issue direction to the third respondent to form independent expert committee to find out the backlog vacancies for SC/ST within a reasonable time frame.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 3, 4 and

7 submitted that earlier for the very same backlog vacancies, the very same petitioner filed W.P.No.23373 of 2008 and the said writ petition was disposed on 23.12.2009, as against which, the very same petitioner filed W.A.No.1946 of 2009 and the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 31.03.2010 confirmed the order passed by the learned Single Judge and the very same issue is again raised by the petitioner. The learned counsel further submitted that writ petition as against the expert opinion is not sustainable and inorder to prove the same, there is no contra evidence available in the hands of the petitioner. Without any contra evidence, the petitioner simply interfering with the administration of the third responsible is not sustainable one.

5.Heard the arguments advanced on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6.Perusal of records reveal that earlier, the very same petitioner filed W.P.No.23373 of 2008 seeking issuance of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned notifications R3/1/2008 and R3/2/2008 dated 10.09.2008 issued by the first respondent therein and quash the same and directing the first respondent to calculate the exact number of backlog vacancies from the year 1971 to till date and fill it up before filling the regular fresh vacancies based up on the represen