Madras High CourtREV.APLW(MD)/94/2024dismissed

K.Ravikumar v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,

2024-06-19Honourable Mrs Justice S.Srimathy6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 19.06.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY REV. APLW.(MD)Nos.94 to 97 of 2024 in W.P.(MD)Nos. 3596, 3593, 3594 & 3595 of 2015 K.Ravikumar ... Petitioner in Rev.Aplw(MD)No.94 of 2024 S.Balamurugan ... Petitioner in Rev.Aplw(MD)No.95 of 2024 S.Sitharthan ... Petitioner in Rev.Aplw(MD)No.96 of 2024 V.Amutha ... Petitioner in Rev.Aplw(MD)No.97 of 2024 Vs.

1. The State of Tamilnadu, Represented by its Principal Secretary, School Education Department, Secretariat, Fort Saint George, Chennai 600 009.

1/6

2. The Teachers Recruitment Board, Represented by its Chairman, 4th Floor, E.V.K. Sampath Malaigai, College Road, Chennai-6.

3. The Director Directorte of School Education, DPI Complex, College Road, Chennai 600 006.

4. The School Education Joint Director (Vocational Education), DPI Complex, College Road, Chennai 600 006.

5. The Chief Educational Officer, Office of the Chief Educational Officer, Thanjavur District, Thanjavur.

6. The Head Master, Government Higher Secondary School, Thiruvonam, Thanjavur District.

... Respondents COMMON PRAYER : Review Application is filed under Section 114 and Order 47 Rule 1 of C.P.C. to review the order dated 03.04.2023 passed by this Court in W.P(MD)No.3596, 3593, 3594 & 3595 of 2015.

2/6

In all the Writ Petitions:

For Petitioners : Mr.S.Malaikani For Respondents : Mr.D.Sadiq Raja, Additional Government Pleader COMMON ORDER The present Review Applications are filed against the order passed in W.P.(MD)No.3596, 3593, 3594 & 3595 of 2015, dated 03.04.2023.

2. The Learned Counsel appearing for the Review Applicants submitted that they are willing to withdraw these Review petitions.

3. While disposing the writ petitions, the respondents were directed to consider the representations of the petitioners and pass orders. Subsequently, the respondents have considered and passed orders. However, without challenging the said order, the Review Applicants have preferred these Review Applications.

3/6

4. Since there is no error apparent on the face of the records, the review applications are not maintainable. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain these Review Applications.

5. Accordingly, these Review Applications are dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the Review Applicants to challenge the order passed by the Respondents. No Costs.

19.06.2024 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet :

Yes / No KSA 4/6