R. VINAYAGA MURUGAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed to call for the records on the file of the 3rd respondent in connection with the order passed by him in his Proc.Na.Ka.No. A2/4998/08, dated nil, February 2011, signed on 24/2/2011 and quash the same to the extent of the petitioner only and direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service with all monetary and service benefits by relaxing the condition of SSLC pass qualification in favour of the petitioner stipulated in G.O.(MS) 245, Rural Development (E5) Department dtd. 4/8/97 under Rule 48 of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules.

(2.) It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner was appointed to the post of Panchayat Assistant by direct recruitment. At the time of his appointment, he disclosed that he did not pass 10th standard. However, on the instructions from the District Collector, Cuddalore, dtd. 7/2/2011, his service had been terminated by an order passed by the Block Development Officer, dtd. 24/2/2011. The District Collector passed an order on the basis of the G.O.(Ms)No.245, Rural Development (E5) Department, dtd. 4/8/97, which states that the part time Panchayat Assistant should have passed SSLC and should not have completed 28 years. He further submitted that petitioner was not aware of the fact that he is required to pass SSLC. In fact, he informed to the authorities at the time of his appointment that he did not pass 10th standard. In the said circumstances, this writ petition is filed.

(3.) In response, the learned counsel for R1, R2 and R4 submitted that petitioner was dead on 6/6/2021 and he is no more and nothing survives in this writ petition.