R.Anbarasan v. Union Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 10.01.2025 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN W.P.No.768 of 2025 1.R.Anbarasan 2.Rajendiran 3.S.Pannerselvam 4.N.Anbarasan 5.J.Buvaneshwari 6.V.Periyannasamy 7.Punitha 8.Ravichandhiran 9.Rajammal R.

10.T.Ilavarasan 11.Mohanraj.L 12.Arthi.G 13.Poornima.A 14.G.Ilamathi 15.A.Geetha 16.R.Karthikeyan 17.T.Naveen Kumar 18.S.Govindan 19.Jayalakshmi 20.M.Manimegalai 21.M.Dhivyanarasimman

22.R.Logarajeswari 23.V.Nivendhan 24.S.Ragul 25.A.Dilipkumar 26.P.Pagalavann 27.J.Jayaraman 28.R.Prabakaran 29.P.Madan Kumar 30.K.Vijayalakshmi 31.P.Balasubramani 32.K.Komathyarasy 33.S.Stalin 34.M.Nithiya 35.G.Vignesh 36.R.Pooja 37.I.Vijay Arokiaraj 38.R.Ragul 39.R.Asswini

...Petitioners

Vs.

1.Union of India, rep.by The Secretary to Government-cum- Controller of Examination, Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms (Personnel Wing) Chief Secretariat, Puducherry.

2.The Under Secretary to Government, Exam Cell, Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms, Chief Secretariat, Puducherry.

3.The Registrar of Co-operative Societies, V.V.P.Nagar, Thattanchavady,

Puducherry - 605 009.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Central Administrative Tribunal at Chennai Bench to expeditiously dispose the O.A.No.1906 of 2024. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Gnanasekar For Respondents (For R1 to R3) : Mr.R.Syed Mustafa Special Government Pleader (Puducherry)

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM , J.) The writ on hand has been instituted to direct the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench to dispose of O.A.No.1906 of 2024 expeditiously.

2. Mr.M.Gnanasekar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner would contend that the Original Application was filed, challenging the select list for appointment to the Post of Junior Inspector of Co-operative Societies in Puducherry. Interim order was declined and thus, the petitioners have chosen to file the present writ petition, seeking speedy disposal of the original application.

3. Question arises, whether High Court in exercise of the powers of Judicial

Review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, issue a direction to the Tribunal or the District Courts to dispose of the cases in a time bound manner. It is for the Courts to decide the matters to be listed on Board and to dispose of accordingly. High Court, issuing frequent directions to dispose of the cases, would cause inconvenience not only to the Judges, who are Presiding over, but also to the litigants, who all are waiting for disposal of their respective cases for long years.

4. The practice of issuing a direction to the Tribunals and District Courts to dispose of the cases in a time bound manner, at no circumstances, be granted unnecessarily and only in exceptional circumstances, High Court may request the Courts to dispose of the matter.

5. The Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of High Court Bar Association, Allahabad Vs. state of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., held that 'in the ordinary course, the Constitutional Courts should refrain from fixing a time-bound schedule for the disposal of cases pending before any other Courts'. Paragraph 47.3 reads thus:

"47.3. Constitutional Courts, in the ordinary course, should refrain from fixing a time-bound schedule for the disposal of cases pending before any other courts. Constitutional Courts may issue direction for the time-bound disposal of cases only in exceptional circumstances. The issue of prioritising the disposal of cases should be best left to the decision of the courts concerned where the cases are pending."

6. The said judgment was relied on by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Sangram Sadashiv Suryavanshi Vs. The State of Maharashtra in Criminal Appeal No (s).4758 of 2024 dated 25.11.2024 and the Apex Court also held that a direction, which can be issued in exceptional circumstances, cannot be issued in a routine manner without noticing the law laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.

7. In view of the above legal position, we have irresistibly arrived at a conclusion that the relief as such sought for cannot be considered.

8. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

[S.M.S., J.] [M.J.R., J.] 10.01.2025 (2/2) Index :

Yes/No Speaking Order :

Yes/No :

Yes/No kak To 1.The Secretary to Government-cum- Controller of Examination, Union of India Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms (Personnel Wing) Chief Secretariat, Puducherry.

2.The Under Secretary to Government, Exam Cell, Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms, Chief Secretariat, Puducherry.

3.The Registrar of Co-operative Societies, V.V.P.Nagar, Thattanchavady, Puducherry - 605 009.

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

AND M.JOTHIRAMAN , J.

kak W.P.No.768 of 2025 (2/2) 10.01.2025