M.Gunasekar, v. The Director,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Date : 26.4.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH K.AGNIHOTRI AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN Writ Appeal Nos.516 and 517 of 2016 M.Gunasekar Appellant in W.A.No.516 of 2016
1. E.Venugopal
2. S.Sasikumar Appellants in W.A.No.517 of 2016
Versus
Villupuram.
3. The Assistant Director, Trichy.
4. Inspector General of Police,
5. Mr.S.Pragdees
6. Mr.Prithiviraj
7. Mr.Solai Samuvel Manohar
8. Mr.S.Thirumalpathy
9. Mr.S.Kalaivannan
10. Mr.S.Pushparaj
11. Mr.J.M.Velu
12. Mr.G.Hasan Badsha
13. Mrs.M.Mahalakshmi
14. Mr.G.Balaji
15. Mr.J.Prasad
16. Mr.M.Raja
17. Mr.M.Manimaran
18. Mr.J.Jagan Kumar
19. Mr.A.Seshathri
20. Mr.M.Suresh Babu
21. Mr.A.Panneerselvam
22. Mrs.S.Revathy
23. Mr.R.Rajmohan
24. Mr.V.Murugesan Respondents in W.A.516/2016 Chennai.
3. Inspector General of Police, Respondents in W.A.517/2016 Prayer: Writ Appeals filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 10.7.2014 made in W.P.Nos.25891 and 29271of 2012 respectively.
WP.No.25891 of 2012:Writ Petitions filed Under Art 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 1st respondent to consider names of the petitioners and sponsor them to the available vacant post Photographer in the Police Department which is under the control and supervision of the third respondent.
For Appellants : Mr.G.Poonkundran For RR 1 to 4 : Ms.T.T.Girija, Government Advocate For R5 : Mr.A.R.Suresh For RR13, 14, 19 and 22 : Mr.M.Satheeshkumar For R21 : Mr.M.Vidyasagar For R15 : Mr.R.Subramanian For RR10, 17 & 18 : Mrs.Jagasundari Balamurugan
COMMON JUDGMENT V.BHARATHIDASAN, J.
The instant intra-court appeals are directed against the common order passed in W.P.Nos.25891 and 29271of 2012 dated 10.7.2014.
2. Since the writ appeals arise out of a common order passed in the writ petitions, they are disposed of by a common order.
3. The appellants filed two writ petitions seeking a direction to the first respondent to consider their names and sponsor them to the available vacant posts of Photographer in the Police Department, which is under the control and supervision of the third and fourth respondent respectively. The above writ petitions have been filed on the ground that the appellants are fully qualified to be appointed as Photographers in the respondent department and also registered their names in the employment exchange, whereas respondents 5 to 24 were appointed as Photographers without appointing the appellants.
4. The learned Single Judge, after hearing the parties, held that without challenging the order of appointment of the private respondents, the writ petitions are not maintainable. However, at the request of the appellants, the learned Judge permitted the appellants to make a representations to the respondent concerned within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the order and the respondent concerned is directed to dispose the representations of the petitioners within a period of four weeks thereafter. Challenging the above order, the present writ appeals are filed.
5. We have heard Mr.G.Poonkundran, learned counsel for the Appellants, Ms.T.T.Girija, learned Government Advocate, for respondents 1 to 4, Mr.A.R.Suresh, learned counsel for the fifth respondent, Mr.M.Satheeshkumar, learned counsel for respondents 13, 14, 19, 22, Mr.M.Vidyasagar, learned counsel for the 21st respondent, Mr.R.Subramanian, learned counsel for the 15th respondent and Mrs.Jagasundari Balamurugan, learned counsel for respondents 10, 17 and 18.
6. Only at the request of the appellants, the learned Single Judge passed the order, directing them to make a representation and the respondents are directed to dispose their representations. After inviting an order from the Court, now, the appellants cannot make any grievance over the same.
7. Now, it is also brought to our notice that pursuant to the order passed by the learned Single Judge, the Additional Director of Police, State Crime Record Bureau, Chennai considering the representation submitted by the appellants
passed an order in and by his proceedings dated 19.8.2014 rejecting their request. Challenging the above order, the appellants filed writ petitions before this court and they are pending. Pursuant to the order passed by the learned Single Judge, the official respondent, considered the representations of the appellants passed orders, and the above orders were also challenged by the appellants before this court, in the said circumstances, nothing remains to adjudicate in the present writ appeals. Hence, the writ appeals fail and consequently, the same are dismissed. No costs.
-s/dAssistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar ssk.
To:
Villupuram.
3. The Assistant Director, Trichy.
4. The Assistant Director, Chennai.
5. Inspector General of Police,
+1 cc to Mr.K.Sathish Kumar, Advocate sr.25951 +2 ccs to Mr.M.Vidyasagam Advocate sr.25989 +2 ccs to Mr.G.Poonkundran Advocate sr.26934,26933 +1 cc to Mr.A.R.Suresh Advocate sr.26134 +1 cc to Mr.R.Subramanian Advocate sr.26679 +1 cc to Government Pleader sr.26038 Writ Appeal Nos.516 & ks(co) aa12/05/2016