1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 01.03.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE CHITRA VENKATARAMAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.SUDANTHIRAM W.A.(MD) No.542 of 2010 1. THE CORRESPONDENT SCHEWARTZ HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL RAMANATHAPURAM 623 501. 2. C.S.I.MADURAI RAMNAD DIOCESE REP. BY RT.REV.A.CHRISTOPHER ASIR BISHOP O MANAGER OF THE DIOCESAN SCHOOLS RATCHANAYAPURAM K.PUDUR MADURAI 625 007. .. APPELLANTS Vs 1. D.DEVARAJ ATHISAYARAJ S/O.M.DAWSON NO.25 OMT 2ND STREET THIRUVALLUVAR NAGAR PALANGANATHAM MADURAI-625 003. 2. THE CHIEF EDUCATIONAL OFFICER OFFICE OF THE CHIEF EDUCATIONAL OFFICER RAMANATHAPURAM 623 501. 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER OFFICE OF DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICE RAMANATHAPURAM 623 501. ..RESPONDENTS Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 28.4.2010 made in W.P.(MD).No.7708 of 2008 on the file of the learned single Judge of this Court and to allow this Writ appeal. WP(MD)NO.7708 of 2008 Prayer : Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order dated 5.8.2008 issued by the respondent No.3 and quash the same as illegal and direct the respondent No.3 reinstate the petitioner with all consequential benefits. For appellants : Mr.G.R.Swaminathan For 1st respondent : Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy For respondents-2 and 3 : Mr.R.Janakiramulu Special Government Pleader JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was made by CHITRA VENKATARAMAN,J.) This Writ Appeal is filed by respondents-3 and 4 in the writ petition against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 28.4.2010 made in W.P. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 (MD).No.7708 of 2008, wherein the first respondent herein sought for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the order dated 05.08.2008 and to direct the third respondent therein, viz., the first appellant herein, to reinstate the petitioner with all consequential benefits. This Court considered the issue and found that the enquiry officer had not conducted an enquiry in a fair and reasonable manner. Further, in spite of the letter sent by the writ petitioner/first respondent herein, the impugned order was passed without even considering the prayer for re-enquiry. In the circumstances, this Court allowed the writ petition and pointed out that since the writ petitioner was at the verge of superannuation, he could not be once again driven to face the enquiry. Accordingly, the writ petitioner/first respondent herein was directed to be reinstated in service. Challenging the same, the present writ appeal has been filed. 2. It is brought to the notice of this Court that after the order passed in the writ petition, the Management had reinstated the first respondent in service on 21.05.2010 and the first respondent had retired from service on 31.05.2010. The appellants having thus complied with the order of the learned Single Judge, we do not find any ground to entertain this appeal. Quite apart from that, even on merits, we do not find any ground to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge. Consequently, this writ appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Connected M.P.(MD) No.2 of 2011 also stands dismissed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(C.S) To 1. THE CHIEF EDUCATIONAL OFFICER OFFICE OF THE CHIEF EDUCATIONAL OFFICER RAMANATHAPURAM 623 501. 2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER OFFICE OF DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICE RAMANATHAPURAM 623 501. +1 CC to Mr. G.R.Swaminathan, Advocate, SR.NO.10918 +2 CCs to Mr. T.Lajapathi Roy, Advocate, SR.No.10717 & 10495 ksv W.A.(MD) No.542 of 2010 Dated: 01.03.2011 TR : 09.03.2011 : 2p/6c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/