Mr.R.Purushothaman v. The State Of Tamilnadu

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 21.07.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR R.Purushothaman ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Department of Education, Secretariat, Chennai - 9.

2.The Chairman Teachers Recruitment Board, EVk Sampath Maaligai, DPI Compound, College Road, Chennai-6.

3.Dr.P.Saraboji 4.M.Manokaran 5.G.B.Brindhadevi 6.R.Ashok Kumar 7.Dr.R.Bhuvaneswari 8.Dr.G.Chandra Mohan

9.S.Sumathi 10.J.Kavitha 11.M.Palanisamy 12.S.Lekha 13.G.Hepzibah Beulah 14.Dr.S.Santhi 15.N.Ezhil Arasi 16.Dr.G.Perumal 17.Dr.P.Mohideen Askarnawas 18.E.Emimal Victoria 19.Dr.P.Sekar 20.Dr.M.S.Premalatha 21.Dr.G.Senthilkumar 22.Dr.M.Senthil Vadivu 23.N.Thirunavukkarasu 24.Dr.P.Serfoji 25.B.Arul Jothi 26.P.Vanithapappa 27.Dr.Beena Somanath ... Respondents

(R3 To R27 - Impleaded as per order dated 07.03.2011 in M.P.No.4/2011 in W.P.No.4623/2011).

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the list of selected candidates selected by the second respondent to the Post of Assistant Professors in Government Arts and Science Colleges under Tamil Nadu Collegiate Education Service-2010 as per results dated 17.02.2011 and quash the same and further appoint the petitioner to the post of Assistant Professors in Government Arts and Science Colleges under Tamil Nadu Collegiate Education Service-2010. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Vijaya Mehanath For R1 : Mr.K.H.Ravikumar Government Advocate For R2 : Mr.C.Kathiravan

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the selection made by the second respondent to the Post of Assistant Professors in Government Arts and Science Colleges under Tamil Nadu Collegiate Education Service and to quash the same.

2. By the date of filing of the present writ petition, the petitioner was aged 43 years and is now aged 57 years. Though the respondents 3 to 27 have been impleaded, most of them are not served with notice as on date.

3. Taking into consideration all these aspects as well as long lapse of time, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner fairly submitted that the writ petition may be closed.

4. In the light of the above, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

21.07.2025 Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking order mtl

To 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Department of Education, Secretariat, Chennai - 9.

2.The Chairman Teachers Recruitment Board, EVk Sampath Maaligai, DPI Compound, College Road, Chennai-6.

MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J.

mtl 21.07.2025