Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

R. Krishnamoorthy Vs. Anna University of Technology, Rep. by Its Registrar, Trichy and Others

R. Krishnamoorthy vs Anna University of Technology, Rep. by Its Registrar, Trichy and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Aug 21, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/933941

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
W.P.(MD) NOS. 5042 TO 5044 OF 2012 & M.P.(MD)NOS. 1,1 & 1 OF 2012
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

R. Krishnamoorthy

Advocate For the Petitioner: R. Krishnamoorthy, Advocate. For the Respondents: R1 and R2 - M. Rajarajan, Advocate.

Respondent

Anna University of Technology, Rep. by Its Registrar, Trichy and Others

Excerpt

(prayer: writ petitions filed under article 226 of the constitution of india praying for issuance of a writ of certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned charge memo nos.aut-t/rego/5722/2011(b) dated 27.03.2012, aut-t/rego/1025/2011(c) dated 30.03.2012 and aut-t/rego/ac-mc/038/pa/2011 (d) dated 12.04.2012 issued by the first respondent and quash the same. common order 1. this common order shall dispose of w.p.(md)nos.5042 to 5044 of 2012, as common question of law and facts are involved. 2. in these writ petitions, the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ, in the nature of certiorari, to quash the charge memos under rule 17(a) of the tamil nadu civil services (discipline and appeal) rules. 3. the only contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is, that the charge memos are without jurisdiction, as the tamil nadu civil services (discipline and appeal) rules are not applicable to the petitioner, as he is governed by service rules of anna university. 4. this fact is not disputed, by the learned counsel for the first and second respondents. 5. consequently, these writ petitions are allowed, the impugned charge memos issued under rule 17(a) of the tamil nadu civil services (discipline and appeal) rules are ordered to be quashed. 6. however, this shall not bar the university from proceeding against petitioner under the applicable service rules. no costs. consequently, the connected m.p.(md)nos.1,1 and 1 of 2012 are closed.

Full Judgment

(Prayer: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the Impugned Charge Memo Nos.AUT-T/REGO/5722/2011(B) dated 27.03.2012, AUT-T/REGO/1025/2011(C) dated 30.03.2012 and AUT-T/REGO/AC-MC/038/PA/2011 (D) dated 12.04.2012 issued by the first respondent and quash the same.

COMMON ORDER

1. This common order shall dispose of W.P.(MD)Nos.5042 to 5044 of 2012, as common question of law and facts are involved.

2. In these writ petitions, the petitioner prays for issuance of a Writ, in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the Charge Memos under Rule 17(a) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules.

3. The only contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is, that the charge memos are without jurisdiction, as the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules are not applicable to the petitioner, as he is governed by Service Rules of Anna University.

4. This fact is not disputed, by the learned counsel for the first and second respondents.

5. Consequently, these writ petitions are allowed, the impugned charge memos issued under Rule 17(a) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules are ordered to be quashed.

6. However, this shall not bar the University from proceeding against petitioner under the applicable service rules.

No costs.

Consequently, the connected M.P.(MD)Nos.1,1 and 1 of 2012 are closed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial