Madras High Court Hears Appeals Against Orders in University Employment Writ Petitions. Appellants, Professors and Heads of Departments, Seek to Set Aside Dismissal of Their Writ Petitions Challenging Actions of Registrar and Colleagues.

High Court: Madras High Court Bench: Principal
  • 54
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The provided judgment text is incomplete and only contains the cause title, advocate appearances, and prayer. It does not include the facts, legal issues, arguments, analysis, or decision of the court. Consequently, a comprehensive summary cannot be constructed.

Issue of Consideration

W.A.NOS.160, 88 AND 163 OF 2026

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (MAD) (07) 84

W.A.Nos.160, 88 and 163 of 2026

2026-07-07

S.M. Subramaniam, N. Senthilkumar

2026:MHC:2688

Mrs.N.Kavitha Rameshwar, Mr.M.Ajmal Khan, Senior Counsel assisted by Mr.S.Nambi Arooran

Dr. E. Chandra, K. Sangeetha, Dr. N. Ponpandian

The Registrar, Bharathiar University; Dr. P. Porkodi; Dr. S. Grace Annapoorani; Dr. P.T. Rajendra Kumar

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ Appeals against orders in writ petitions concerning service matters of university professors.

Remedy Sought

To set aside the orders dated 11.11.2025 passed in W.P.Nos.43517, 43508 and 43513 of 2025.

Previous Decisions

Orders dated 11.11.2025 in respective writ petitions.

Procedural History

Writ petitions (W.P.Nos.43517, 43508, 43513 of 2025) filed; orders passed on 11.11.2025; writ appeals filed against those orders under Clause 15 of Letters Patent.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Freedom Fighter Category Male Candidate to Fill Vacant Seat in B.V.Sc & A.H. Course Despite Horizontal Female Reservation. Horizontal reservation for females cannot be applied to deny admission to a male candidate when no fem...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Judgment on Limitation Act Application Due to Lack of Good Faith. Plaintiffs' Claim for Exclusion of Time Under Section 14 of the Limitation Act Fails as They Were Aware of Non-Joinder of Necessary Party.