K ALLIMUTHU Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner prays for the issue of a writ of Certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the third respondent in KA. No. E4/3634/tha Aa Poka (Salem Division-I) dated 1.6.1998. quash the same and consequentially direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in any suitable post without causing reduction in salary, seniority and other attendant benefits with-beckwages and continuity of service etc..

(2.) HEARD Mr. J. Saravanavel, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, Mr. HP. Kabilan, learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 3 and Mr. A. Paramasivam, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1.

(3.) THE contention raised in the writ petition is covered by the judgment of the Apex Court relied on by the petitioner. Though Mr. R.P. Kabilan, learned counsel points put that as per the State Government directions, alternate employment, suitable to the physical condition, had to be given as a fresh appointment, this contention of Mr. R.P. Kabilan, learned counsel, cannot be sustained in view of the pronouncement of the Apex Court in Narendra Kumar Chandla v. State of Haryana , reported in JT 1994 (2) SC 94, wherein it has been held thus:-