Madras High CourtWP/24283/2016disposed of

V.Elayaraja v. The Commissioner

2023-09-15Honourable Mr Justice C.V. Karthikeyan5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 15.09.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN WP.No.24283/2016 & WMP.Nos.20757 & 20758/2016 V.Elayaraja ... Petitioner

Versus

1.The Commissioner Vellore Corporation Vellore, Vellore District.

2.The Commissioner for Municipal Administration, Chepauk, Chennai-5.

3.Thiru Rajesh Kumar ... Respondents Prayer : - Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 27.01.2016 and 19.02.2016 issued in Na.Ka.No.15482/2015/111 and quash the same and consequently, to direct the 1st respondent to appoint the petitioner in the place of the 3rd respondent with all attendant service and monetary benefits.

For Petitioner :

Mr.P.I.Thirumurthy For R1 :

Mr.S.Silambanan Additional Advocate General assisted by Ms.P.Shanthi Standing Counsel For R2 :

Mr.S.Ravikumar, Spl.GP For R3 :

Adithya Varadarajan

ORDER

(1) The writ petition has been filed in the nature of a certiorarified mandamus seeking records relating to the orders of the 1st respondent, Commissioner, Vellore Corporation dated 27.01.2016 and 19.02.2016 respectively and to quash the same and to direct the 1st respondent to appoint the petitioner in the place of 3rd respondent and to grant all attendant and monetary benefits. (2) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner ; learned Additional Advocate General assisted by the learned Standing counsel appearing for the 1st respondent/Corporation and the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent.

(3) Even before the arguments could commence, the learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner had been granted seniority and

therefore, the issues raised in the writ petition are not pressed for adjudication by this Court.

(4) Let the matter rest at that. The learned Additional Advocate General also affirms the fact that the petitioner had been subsequently promoted. No further orders are required.

(5) The learned counsel for the petitioner however placed a request that the seniority of the petitioner should be examined by this Court. However, the learned Advocate Additional General stated that, that would be beyond the scope of the writ petition. (6) The petitioner may give necessary representations and if representations are given, the concerned official may issue notice to the petitioner and also to the 3rd respondent and examine their credentials and pass appropriate orders.

(7) The writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 15.09.2023 AP Internet : Yes

To 1.The Commissioner Vellore Corporation Vellore, Vellore District.

2.The Commissioner for Municipal Administration, Chepauk, Chennai-5.

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J., AP 15.09.2023