Dismissed

Palaniappan, v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC6 Mar 2014WP(MD)/4016/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court dismissed a writ petition filed as a public interest litigation challenging the fixation of pay scales for extension officers. The court held that the matter pertained exclusively to service administration and did not fall within the exceptions permitting PIL in service disputes.

What did the court decide?

Confirmation that no writ of certiorari can be issued to quash the impugned order as it is a service matter not amenable to PIL.

Palaniappan, Vs the State of Tamil Nadu — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06.03.2014

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN

¶5

and

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI

¶7

Writ Petition (MD) No.4016 of 2014

¶8

Palaniappan ... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The State of Tamil Nadu,

¶11

represented by the Secretary to Government, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries Department, Fort St., George,Chennai.

¶12

2.The Commissioner,

¶13

Milk Production and Dairy Department,

¶14

Madhavaram,Chennai 51.

¶15

3.The General Manager,

¶16

Sivagangai District Co-operative Milk

¶17

Producers Union Ltd.,

¶18

Karaikudi, Sivagangai District 630 002.

¶19

4.M.Gunasekaran

¶20

5.K.Jeyapaul 6.S.Perumal

¶21

7.S.Jeganathan 8.P.Manohar

¶22

9.A.Rajendran ... Respondents

¶23

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the 2nd Respondent in Rc. NO. 14101/12/13 dated 12.02.2014 and quash the same.

¶24

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Kannan

¶25

For Respondents 1-3 : Mr.Aayiram K.Selvakumar, Government Advocate.

¶26

ORDER

¶27

(Order of the Court was made by V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN,J. )

¶28

The petitioner who claims to be a public spirited person and also belonging to a political party has come up with the above Public Interest Litigation challenging an order passed by the Commissioner of Milk Production and Dairy Development, granting fixation of the scales of pay of six Extension Officers, Grade I in the cadre of Assistant Managers (Milk Production).

¶29

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶30

¶31

2.Heard Mr.V.Kannan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

¶32

3.The petitioner does not belong to the Department of Milk Production and Dairy Development. He is actually a stranger to the Department. What is assailed in the writ petition is an order passed by the Commissioner for Milk Production and Dairy Development, implementing the report and recommendations of a Committee constituted for the purpose of determining the time scales of pay to be paid to the employees of Karaikudi Milk Supply Society, on its amalgamation with the Sivagangai District Co-operative Milk Producers Union.

¶33

4.A perusal of the order impugned in the writ petition shows that two societies were amalgamated and the question of fixation of time scales of pay in respect of the employees of one society, engaged the attention of the Department for quite sometime. Ultimately, on the recommendation of a Committee, the impugned order has been passed.

¶34

5.Therefore, what is sought to be agitated by the petitioner in this writ petition is actually a service matter in respect of which no Public Interest Litigation would lie. This case does not belong to one of those exceptions where a Public Interest Litigation can be entertained in a service matter. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

Assistant Registrar(Crl.Side)

¶37

/TRUE COPY/

¶38

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶39

¶40

The Secretary to Government, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries Department, Fort St., George,Chennai.

¶41

2.The Commissioner,

¶42

Milk Production and Dairy Department, Madhavaram,Chennai 51.

¶43

3.The General Manager,

¶44

Sivagangai District Co-operative Milk Producers Union Ltd.,

¶45

Karaikudi,Sivagangai District 630 002.

¶46

+1cc to Mr.Aayiram K.Selvakumar,Advocate SR.No.14355 +1cc to Mr.V.Kannan, Advocate SR.No.14601 +1cc to Special Govt.Pleader SR.No.14404

¶47

Writ Petition (MD) No.4016 of 2014 06.03.2014

¶48

sms

¶49

PA/18.03.2014/2P/7C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Palaniappan, v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Palaniappan, v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Elavarasan, Vs the Secretary

Micheal, Vs the District Collector

S. Ponnuchamy Vs the District Collector

The Manager Director, Vs M.Muniyasamy

M. Sivachandran, Vs Tneb., Rep. by Its Chairman

M/S. Sec Cfs, a Division of Vs Union of India, Rep. by Its