Mrs.V.Valarmathi, v. The Director,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 22.11.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.No.29967 of 2017 V.Valarmathi ..

Petitioner -vs1. The Director, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai - 600 036

2. The Dean Administration, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai - 600 036

3. The Registrar, Indian Institute of Technology Madras Chennai - 600 036 .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 17.07.2017 within a time frame.

For Petitioner ::` Mr.K.Venkateswaran For Respondents:: Mr.R.A.S.Senthilvel Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

The Writ Petition has been filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 17.07.2017 within a time frame.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that when the 1st respondent had issued advertisement for the post of Junior Technician in Advertisement No.IITM/R/4/2008 dated 24.10.2008, inviting applications from the eligible candidates for the said post, the petitioner applied for the said post and took part in the written examination held on 21.12.2009. After participating in the written examination, the petitioner was called for interview and her name was also found in the said list at Sl.No.103 (Annexure II).

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that the petitioner is the only candidate, who had chosen the Physics Department, which is evident from the list annexed with https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Reply dated 23.05.2017 given by the Registrar and Public Information officer. He would also submit that when total vacancies in the Department of Physics are three, out of three vacancies, only two vacancies were filled up and, that too, persons who had chosen the Electronic Department were selected, whereas the petitioner, who had chosen the same branch, namely, Physics was not selected. Hence the petitioner has given her representation on 17.07.2017 to the respondents, however, the said representation has not been considered, therefore, the present writ petition is filed.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Advocate for the respondents and perused the documents available on record.

5. This Court is unable to find any merit on the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner to entertain this Writ Petition. The reason is, when the Advertisement was issued on 24.10.2008 and the petitioner has taken part in the written examination held on 21.12.2009, she cannot come to this Court seeking a direction to consider her representation dated 17.07.2017 with a huge delay of 8 years. Therefore, the prayer in this Writ petition is liable to be rejected for long lapse and laches. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed on the ground of laches. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar ssd To

1. The Director, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai - 600 036

2. The Dean Administration, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai

3. The Registrar, Indian Institute of Technology Madras Chennai - 600 036 +1cc to Mr.K.Venkateswaran, Advocate SR.No.83489 W.P.No.29967 of 2017 sm:14.12.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/