- Court
- High Court of Madras
- Decided
- 9 August 2023
- Bench
- Battu Devanand
- Case no.
- WP(MD) 21773/2017
Judgment
O R D E R The learned counsel for the petitioners on record submits that he intends to withdraw this Writ Petition as per the instruction of his clients and sought permission.
¶2The statement of the learned counsel is placed on record.
¶3Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
¶4No costs.
¶5Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
09.08.2023 Index : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No CM To,
1.The Principal Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, St.Fort George, Chennai.
2.The Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, Chennai.
3.The Director, Directorate of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Panagal Maligai, Saidapet, Chennai,
4.The District Collector, Madurai, Madurai District.
BATTU DEVANAND, J. CM W.P.(MD)No.21773 of 2017 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.18065 and 18066 of 2017
09.08.2023
Case details
Parties and counsel
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 09.08.2023 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND W.P.(MD)No.21773 of 2017 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.18065 and 18066 of 2017 1.B.Sundarajrajan 2.V.Chinnaiah 3.R.Sudharsanan ...Petitioners Vs. 1.The Principal Secretary to Government, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, St.Fort George, Chennai. 2.The Director, Directorate of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Panagal Maligai, Saidapet, Chennai, 3.Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Rep. By its Secretary, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C.Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 03. 4.The District Collector, Madurai, Madurai District. 5.Ramadevi 6.R.Sankari 7.S.Kannan 8.M.Manjula 9.M.Pushpaleela 10.M.S.Jeyaprakash 11.Kayalvizhi 12.P.Thannayiram 13.P.Pitchairaj 14.M.Rajalakshmi 15.A.Kannan 16.K.Sivamani 17.G.K.Neelakandan 18.P.Muniappan 19.N.Nagarathinam 20.R.Saratha 21.T.Murugeswari 22.M.Jegatalakshmi 23.K.Latha 24.P.R.Thirunavukarasu 25.R.Muthu Kumar 26.M.S.Raja 27.T.Kanthasamy 28.V.Sankareswari 29.M.Chittammal 30.P.Petchiammal 31.R.Meena 32.P.Kaniselvi 33.S.Saravanamuthukrishnan ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 4th respondent in Na.Ka.No.22033/2017/U.Va-2 dated 05.06.2017 and Na.Ka.No.15673/2013/U.Va-2 dated 26.07.2013 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 4 to place the petitioners (directly recruited Assistants) over and above the respondents 5 to 33 (appointed by promotion in the seniority list for the post of Assistants. For Petitioners : Mr.R.J.Karthik For R1, R2 & R4 : Mr.A.Kannan Additional Government Pleader For R3 : Mr.J.Anand Kumar For R5 to R12 : Mr.B.Senthil Kumar For R13, R15 to R22 R24 to R33 : No appearance
Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.