SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 24272

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.DHANDAPANI, J
M.Sivaraman – Appellant
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu – Respondent
Writ Petition



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.S.Karthikeyan
For the Respondents: Ms.Mythrye Chandru for R1 & R2, Mr.C.Kathiravan for R3

Court mandates administrative bodies to timely consider representations in recruitment processes.

Headnote:The present petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, concerns a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 15.12.2025 regarding recruitment for the post of PG Assistant. The petitioner claims inclusion in the waiting list for available vacancies. The court directed the 2nd and 3rd respondents to consider the representation within six weeks. The key issue framed by the court was the timely consideration of the representation. The court reasoned that such a directive does not require delving into the merits of the case and rests on principle of fair administrative action.

Result: The writ petition is disposed of with directions.

Table of Content
1. the court considers the representation for recruitment. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. court directs administration to act on representation. (Para 4)

ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner representation dated 15.12.2025 within a reasonable time to be fixed by this Honble Court.

2.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner participated in the recruitment for the post of PG Assistant under the MBC category pursuant to Notification No.10/2019 dated 12.06.2019 issued by the Teachers' Recruitment Board. The grievance of the petitioner is that certain vacancies are still available in the said post, which can be filled from the waiting list. The petitioner is included in the waiting list and, in order to secure appointment, submitted a representation dated 15.12.2025. However, no order has been passed on the representation. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it would suffice, if a direction is issued to the 2nd and 3rd respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 15.12.2025 within a reasonable time to be fixed by this Court.

4.Considering the limited request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, directs the 2nd and 3rd respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 15.12.2025 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5.With the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top