P JOHN SOLOMON Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH the third respondent was served through private notice and proof affidavit was filed, he has not chosen to appear either in person or through counsel. In the absence of the third respondent, arguments of the counsel for the petitioner and the official respondents were heard.

(2.) THESE writ petitions arose out of O.A.Nos.10494 of 1997 and 86 of 1998 filed by the petitioner before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal. In view of the abolition of the Tribunal, the matters were transferred to this court and were renumbered as W.P.Nos.27288 and 31998 of 2005.

(3.) IN the first writ petition the challenge is to the order of the first respondent, dated 2.9.96 and the consequential proceedings of the second respondent dated 9.9.96 and for a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to appoint the petitioner as a Reader of Pediatric Hematology. It is the claim of the petitioner that the third respondent did not possess qualification for holding the post of Reader in Pediatric Hematology.