V.Thiagarajan v. The Commanding Officer

W.P.No.26833 of 2016 S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.

The writ petition has been listed under the caption "for being mentioned" at the insistence of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner made a submission that it was inadvertently represented before this Court that the writ petitioner was appointed, which was recorded and the writ petition was closed.

3. Subsequently, the writ petitioner informed the learned counsel that he was not appointed and he was already over aged and thus, not eligible for appointment. That being the factum, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the kith and kin of the petitioner are eligible for the appointment as per the scheme, if they are other wise eligible and qualified. This being the factum now informed to this Court, the eligible persons are at liberty to submit an application before the competent authority for considering their case under the scheme which is in force.

4. With these clarifications, the writ petition stands disposed of. 27.04.2023 (drm) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.

(drm) W.P.No.26833 of 2016 27.04.2023 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis