IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.T. Asha, J
N.Veeraiah – Appellant
Versus
The State – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petitions initiated for restoring posts. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court mandates fair process for administrative decisions. (Para 3) |
COMMON ORDER
These writ petitions have been filed for the following reliefs:
“To issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned orders in Revision Petition No.2/2025 dated 20.11.2025 and Revision Petition No.1/2025 dated 20.11.2025 passed by the 3rd respondent, quash the same, and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 7 to restore the petitioner to the post of Assistant Manager in view of the orders dated 14.03.2024 and
21.11.2024 passed by the 5th respondent.”
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 fairly submitted that the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity to put forth his case.
3. Considering the fact that the impugned orders have been passed without affording an opportunity to the petitioner and without providing him with all the relevant documents, this Court is not inclined to go into the merits of the case. Accordingly, the impugned orders are set aside
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.