Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.SATHISH KUMAR, M.JOTHIRAMAN, JJ
R.Palaniappan – Appellant
Versus
The Chairman, University Grants Commission – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner files for a writ to challenge notification. (Para 1 , 2) |
(Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.)
The petitioner, claiming as an Advocate, filed the writ petition in the Public Interest Litigation to consider his representation.
2. The main grievance of the petitioner is that a notification was issued by the Director of Legal Studies, Chennai, for appointment of Assistant Professors and Associate Professors and the appointments are to be made in subject wise and cannot be general appointment and if it is not to do so, the same will have a serious impact.
3. The learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents
2 to 4 submits that the petitioner is attempting to challenge the notification in this writ petition filed as public interest litigation. However, he cannot challenge the same and hence, prays to dismiss the writ petition.
4. Heard both sides and perused the records.
5. Though the petitioner filed this writ petition as public interest, claiming that the appointment of Assistant Professors and Associate Professors has to be made in subject wise, the fact remains that he seeks to challenge the notification. Hence, this Court is of the
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
