AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N. Paul Vasantha Kumar, J.—Heard Mrs. A. Shrijayanthy, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the appellants and Mr. C.K. Chandrasekkar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
This writ appeal is filed against the order made in W.P.No. 7391 of 2007 dated 20.12.2011 wherein the respondent has prayed to quash the order of the 3rd appellant dated 28.1.2002 in Proceedings No. G3/47075/2000 and direct the appellants to count the services rendered by the respondent from 28.4.1986 for all purposes including pay fixation, seniority, grant of Selection Grade and terminal benefits. Originally, O.A.No. 5295 of 1991 was filed before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal and on being transferred to this Court, the said O.A. was numbered as W.P.No. 7391 of 2007.
The learned single Judge allowed the writ petition by following the earlier orders of this Court in the decision reported in V. Perumal Vs. The Commissioner and Secretary to the Government, Health and Family Welfare Department, The Director of Medical Education and The Dean, and W.P.No. 3493 of 2007 dated 20.10.2011 and those orders were also implemented. Even, the impugned order was also implemented by the appellants on 22.6.2012 without stating anything about the appeal to be preferred and thereafter, the seniority was revised and promotion was also given to the respondent.
It is pertinent to point out that the present writ appeal was admitted on 15.10.2012. The order of the learned single Judge was dated 20.12.2011 and the order of the learned single Judge was implemented as early as on 22.6.2012. Thus, it is beyond doubt that when the appeal was posted for admission, the order of the learned single Judge made in W.P.No. 7391 of 2007 dated 20.12.2011 was implemented and acted upon.
In such view of the matter, the present writ appeal which was admitted on 15.10.2012 without noticing the implementation order passed on 22.6.2012, cannot take advantage by the appellant and infact the writ appeal itself has become infructuous on the date when the writ appeal was posted for admission.
Hence, the writ appeal is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No. 1 of 2012 is closed.