Madras High Court
M.Balaiyan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 8 September, 2022
WP No.35804 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08-09-2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
WP No.35804 of 2016
M.Balaiyan .. Petitioner
vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by
its Principal Secretary to Government,
Higher Education (C2) Department,
Secretariat,
Chennai-9.
2.The Principal Secretary/Commissioner,
Directorate of Technical Education,
Chennai-25. .. Respondents
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to
promote the petitioner as Instructor on par with similarly placed person
Mr.K.Chandrasekaran with all benefits based on this Court orders.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Arumugam
1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP No.35804 of 2016
For Respondents : Mr.B.Vijay,
Additional Government Pleader.
ORDER
The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the
respondents to promote the petitioner as Instructor on par with similarly
placed person Mr.K.Chandrasekaran with all benefits.
2. The issues raised in this writ petition were decided by this
Court in a batch of writ petitions and the State of Tamil Nadu preferred an
appeal in W.A.No.2820 of 2018 & etc., batch of cases.
3. The Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court passed orders on
13.07.2022 and allowed the writ appeals filed by the State with the following
observations:
“62. In the light of the above discussion, we
are not inclined to accept the submission of the
respondents. We are of the view that the
respondents claim cannot be countenanced for the
reason that the post of Instructors is now
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP No.35804 of 2016
abolished and the post of the Lecturer is made an
entry level post and due to the abolition of the said
post it may not be possible to fix the pay scale for
the post of Instructor. We are therefore of the view
that no purpose would be served if the respondents
claim is allowed. On the contrary it may lead to
confusion in extending the benefits.
63. In view of the declaration of law by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above referred
Judgment we allow the writ appeals and dismiss
the writ petition. In the circumstances of the case,
there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently,
the connected Miscellaneous Petitions stands
closed.”
4. In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this
Court, the grounds raised in the writ petition are no more res integra and
thus, the petitioner is not entitled for the relief as such sought for in the writ
petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP No.35804 of 2016
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Svn
5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. However,
there shall be no order as to costs.
08-09-2022
Index : Yes/No.
Internet : Yes/No.
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order.
Svn
To
1.The Principal Secretary to Government,
State of Tamil Nadu,
Higher Education (C2) Department,
Secretariat,
Chennai-9.
2.The Principal Secretary/Commissioner,
Directorate of Technical Education,
Chennai-25.
WP 35804 of 2016
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
