R.Jothi Prakash, v. The State Of Tamilnadu,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 22.11.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN and M.P.Nos.1 to 3 of 2014 1.R.Jothi Prakash 2.R.Suresh 3.J.Mohamed Ali 4.S.Saravanan 5.R.Elanchizhan 6.S.Jothikumar 7.N.Vasantharajan 8.P.Venkatesan 9.K.ChandraSekar 10.D.Kalaivanan 11.R.Mohan 12.A.Parthipan 13.R.Elavarasan 14.M.Rajesh 15.K.Sivanesan 16.K.Ravichandiran 17.S.Ramadass 18.P.Karthikeyan 19.H.Nisar 20.G.Karthick 21.C.Ramkumar 22.V.Ramesh 23.C.Gnanapandiyan 24.S.Tamilselvan 25.M.Kothandan 26.N.Mohan 27.P.K.Shaber 1/6
28.M.Kannan 29.S.Anbarasu 30.S.Revendiran 31.S.Tamilarasu 32.M.Pannerselvam 33.B.Madhankumar 34.C.P.Prabakaran 35.K.Kotteswaran 36.J.Udayamoorthy 37.R.Gobinath 38.A.Anbalazhan 39.V.Nethaji 40.M.Jegathesan 41.S.Saravanan 42.M.Harikrishnan 43.P.Manikandan 44.D.Balamurugan 45.E.Rajababu 46.S.Sinivasan 47.M.Gopalakrishnan 48.S.Prakash 49.G.Danasekaran 50.S.Senthilkumaran 51.V.Stalin 52.K.Alagiri 53.R.Sadamhussain 54.T.Sarangabani 55.E.Muthu 56.S.Nirmal 57.G.Vinothkanna 58.K.Kumar 59.J.Selvam 60.S.Mathan 61.J.Sathishkumar 62.S.Surendiran 63.M.Hemanthkumar 64.G.Kovalan 2/6
65.R.Velan 66.P.Easvaran 67.V.Ramkumar 68.R.Veerendhir Kumar 69.J.Mohamed Ali 70.M.Pushpa Kumar 71.G.Durairaj 72.S.Ranjith Kumar 73.K.Ramachandran 74.K.Rajesh 75.B.Magendiran 76.N.Amanudeen 77.N.Rajesh 78.K.Durairaj 79.B.Manikandan 80.K.Priyaraj 81.C.Pazhani 82.E.Jeeva 83.M.Saravanan 84.J.Athavullah 85.E.Ranjith Kumar 86.M.Ashok 87.K.Sathish Kumar 88.A.Mohamed Ali 89.G.Sathiq Basha 90.E.Muthu Ganesh 91.S.Jaya Ganesh 92.M.Logesh 93.R.Kishore 94.S.Bharathi Kumar 95.A.C.Paranthaman 96.R.Arunkumar 97.S.Mathan Kumar 98.V.Magendiran 99.G.Dinesh Kumar 100.E.Sathish Kumar ...
Petitioners versus 3/6
1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Home Department (Police), Fort St. George, Chennai - 9.
2.The Director General of Police, Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 4.
3.The Chair Person, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, P.T.Chengalvarayan Maligai, Anna Salai, Chennai - 2.
...
Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records relating to the impugned G.O. passed by the first respondent in G.O.(Ms.)No.820 Home (Police IX) Department, dated 23.09.2009 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to follow the single system recruitment by implementing G.O.(Ms.)No.938-Home (Service-G) Department, dated 03.05.1990 passed by the first respondent in so far relates to the petitioners are concerned.
For Petitioners :
Ms.N.Karpagalakshmi for Mr.C.Prakasam For Respondents :
Mr.P.Ananda Kumar Government Advocate
O R D E R
Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the relief sought for in the present writ petition has become infructuous and she has also made an endorsement to that effect.
4/6
2.
Recording the submission and endorsement made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 3.
There shall be no order as to costs.
22.11.2024 Speaking order / Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No : Yes / No sri To 1.The Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu, Home Department (Police), Fort St. George, Chennai - 9.
2.The Director General of Police, Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 4.
3.The Chair Person, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, P.T.Chengalvarayan Maligai, Anna Salai, Chennai - 2.
5/6
G.ARUL MURUGAN , J.
sri and M.P.Nos.1 to 3 of 2014 22.11.2024 6/6