V. GAJENDRAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Mr. S. Louis, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. K. Muthu, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents 1 to 3 and Mr. J. SakthiKumaran, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 4 and 5.

(2.) We are not adjudicating this writ petition on merits and disposal of the writ petition should not be taken to be the acceptance of the claim of either of the parties in respect of the issues raised that certain unqualified, under qualified, ineligible persons are occupying office in the respondent TANGEDCO.

(3.) This is styled as a Public Interest Litigation. A preliminary objection has been raised by the learned Counsel for the respondents that such a writ petition would not be maintainable moreso, in the wake of the fact that the petitioner herein has disclosed in paragraph No.6 that there are writ petitions of Quo Warranto already pending for the said purpose being, W.P.(MD).No.19472 of 2018 and W.P(MD).No.24234 of 2018.