Madras High Court
P.Krishnakumar vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 21 October, 2024
Bench: S.S. Sundar, Mohammed Shaffiq
Rev.Appl.No.21/2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 21.10.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SUNDAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
Rev.Appl.No.21/2024
P.Krishnakumar ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
rep.by its Secretary
Department of Human Resources
Management, Secretariat
Chennai 600 009.
2.The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission,
[TNPSC], rep.by its Secretary
TNPSC Road, VOC Nagar,
Park Town , Chennai 600 003.
3.The Principal Secretary to Government
Department of Highways & Minor Ports
Government of Tamilnadu
Secretariat, Chennai 600 009. ... Respondents
1
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Rev.Appl.No.21/2024
Prayer : Review Application filed under Order XLVII Rule 1 of CPC read
with Section 114 of CPC against the order dated 06.06.2022 made in
WA.No.237/2022 in confirming the order dated 08.12.2021 made in
WO.No.19146/2021.
For Petitioner : Ms.N.Kavitha Rameshwar
For RR 1, 3 to 5 : Mr.P.Balathandayutham, SplGP
For R2 : Mr.P.J.Rishikesh, Standing counsel
ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by S.S.SUNDAR, J.,]
(1)The present review application is filed to review the judgment passed in
WA.No. 237/2022 dated 06.06.2022.
(2)Having regard to the scope of review as settled by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court and this Court in several precedents, this Court is unable to
entertain this review application.
(3)The learned counsel for the review applicant relied upon Section 68 of the
Government Servants [Conditions of Services] Act, 2016. It is useful to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
refer to explanation [2] of Section 25 where the position is clarified to the
effect that a degree in the subject should be deemed to be a higher
qualification when Diploma in the particular subject is prescribed as
qualification. Taking note of the principles settled by this Court in
another judgment, the Division Bench has consciously dismissed the writ
appeal holding that there is no merits in any of the submissions of the
learned counsel for the appellant/review applicant.
(4)This Court finds no error apparent on the face of the record to interfere
with the review application.
(5)The residuary argument of the learned counsel for the review applicant is
that they have challenged Section 25 of the Act in another writ petition
and the writ petition may also be heard along with this review application.
(6)The review cannot be entertained on the ground that a different order is
possible in case a writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of
Section 25 is allowed. As on date, in the absence of any order staying the
operation of Section 25 of the Act, this Court cannot accept this
contention to sustain the review application.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
(7)Hence, the review application stands dismissed. No costs.
[SSSRJ] [MSQJ]
21.10.2024
AP
Index : Yes
Internet : Yes
Neutral Citation:Yes
To
1.The Secretary
State of Tamil Nadu
Department of Human Resources
Management, Secretariat
Chennai 600 009.
2.The Secretary
Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission,
[TNPSC], TNPSC Road, VOC Nagar,
Park Town , Chennai 600 003.
3.The Principal Secretary to Government
Department of Highways & Minor Ports
Government of Tamilnadu
Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.S. SUNDAR, J.,
and
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.,
AP
21.10.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
