Madras High Court
S.Ganesan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 9 October, 2020
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam
W.P.(MD).No.1578 of 2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 09.10.2020
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.(MD).No.1578 of 2014
and
M.P.(MD)Nos.2 and 3 of 2014
1.S.Ganesan
2.D.Nanthakumar
3.T.Sankar
4.R.Ganapathi Murugan
5.N.Yagnanarayanan ... Petitioners
-Vs-
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
Represented by its Principal Secretary,
Department of Hindu Religious and Charitable
Endowments and Tourism,
Fort St. George, Chennai-09.
2.The Commissioner,
Department of Hindu Religious and Charitable
Endowments,
No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai,
Nungambakkam,
Chennai-34.
3.The Secretary,
Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission,
V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town,
1/4
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.(MD).No.1578 of 2014
Chennai-01 ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records
pertaining to the impugned Amendment to the Special Rules for the
Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments
Administration Service vide G.O.Ms.NO.335, Tamil Development,
Religious Endowments and Information, dated 09.11.2009, on the file of
the first respondent and the Notification No.20/2013, dated 19.12.2013
on the file of the third respondent and quash the same as illegal to the
extent of fixing experience of not less than six years in the post of
Executive Officer, Grade I as qualification for applying for the post of
Assistant Commissioner in the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and
Charitable Endowments Department and consequently to direct the third
respondent to permit the petitioners to participate in the recruitment to
the post of Assistant Commissioner in pursuance to the Notification No:
20/2013 on the file of the third respondent within the time stipulated by
this Court.
For Petitioners : M/s.Tamilmalar
for M/s.T.Lajapathi Roy
For R1 and R2 : Mr.R.Murugaraj
Government Advocate
For R3 : Mr.K.K.Senthil
2/4
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.(MD).No.1578 of 2014
ORDER
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioners get oral instruction from the writ petitioners that they are not interested in pursuing the remedy, on account of various developments occurred, during the pendency of the writ petition. In view of the said submission, no further adjudication is required. Accordingly, the writ petition stands closed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
09.10.2020
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
sji
3/4
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.(MD).No.1578 of 2014
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.
sji
W.P.(MD).No.1578 of 2014
09.10.2020
4/4
http://www.judis.nic.in