M.Renganathan v. the State of Tamilnadu
Case brief
What is this about?
This thin order notes that the second respondent's counter affidavit clarifies that the petitioner's pensionary benefits had already been revised considering service from 01.06.1988. Consequently, the court viewed no further direction as necessary, closing the petition without costs.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.04.2015
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN
Writ Petition No.19149 of 2012
M.Renganathan ...Petitioner
-vs-
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by its Secretary to Government,
School Education Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Accountant General (A & E)
Anna Salai, Teynampet,
Chennai - 600 018.
3.The District Elementary Educational Officer,
Pudukottai, Pudukottai District.
4.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer,
Manamelkudi, Pudukottai District. ...Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner representation dated 20.02.2012 for refixation of special grade scale of pay on par with Headmaster's post with notional effect from 01.06.1988, consequently pay all the retiral benefits to the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sreedharan
For Respondents : Mr.S.Gunasekaran Government Advocate for R1,R3 and R4 Mr.V.Vijayshankar for R2
The petitioner was appointed as Junior Grade Teacher in Puvalam Panchayat Union Elementary School. Subsequently, he joined as Secondary Grade Teacher on 01.10.1970. He was promoted as
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ court should direct the respondents to pass orders on the petitioner's representation for re-fixation of special grade scale of pay?
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
M.Renganathan
- respondent
The State of Tamil Nadu
Coram
D.Haripanthaman
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court