Disposed

S.Vijayalakshmi, Dy Block v. The District Collector

Madras HC24 Jul 2015WP/22254/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner challenged her exclusion from a promotion panel while a junior colleague was promoted. The court disposed of the petition by directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation on merits within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent to consider petitioner's representation on merits and pass orders within eight weeks.

S.Vijayalakshmi, Dy Block Vs The District… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 24.07.2015

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN

¶5

W.P.No.22254 of 2015

¶6

S.Vijayalakshmi ... Petitioner
Versus
The District Collector
Cuddalore District
Cuddalore – 607 001 ... Respondent
PRAYER: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the
respondent to consider the representation dated 29.06.2015 of the
petitioner to promote the petitioner on par with next junior
R.Mohanraj and thereby include the petitioner in the order passed in
Na.Ka.No.PA2/2237/2015(1) dated 19.06.2015.

¶7

For Petitioner : Mr.A.R.Nixon
For Respondent : Mr.K.Rajendra Prasad
Government Advocate
O R D E R

¶8

In view of the narrow prayer made during the hearing of the writ petition, the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.

¶9

The petitioner is now serving as a Deputy Block Development Officer in Pudupalayam Panchayat Union, Cuddalore District. The grievance of the petitioner is that one Mohanraj, who is junior to the petitioner, was promoted as Block Development Officer vide proceedings dated 19.06.2015 of the District Collector , but the petitioner was not given promotion. Hence, the petitioner made a representation dated 29.06.2015 to the respondent to include her name in the panel of promotion and to promote her from the date on which her junior was promoted as Block Development officer.

¶10

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

¶11

Heard Mr.K.Rajendra Prasad, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent.

¶12

In view of the narrow prayer made, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 29.06.2015 on merits and in accordance with law and pass orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶13

Sd/Assistant Registrar

¶14

True Copy
Sub Assistant Registrar
gpa
To
The District Collector
Cuddalore District
Cuddalore – 607 001.
1 cc to Mr.A.R.Nixon , Advocate Sr.No.38101
1 cc to Government Pleader.Sr.No.38053
W.P.No.22254 of 2015
GP(CO)
PMK.11.8.2015

¶15

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

S.Vijayalakshmi, Dy Block v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Vijayalakshmi, Dy Block v. The District Collector

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

K.Maragatham Vs The Commissioner

A.Murugan Vs The State of Tamilnadu

M.Bheemavathi, Vs The Director of School

C.Prabu Vs The Director

Tmt.R.Sathya, D.T.Ed., B.Lit., Vs The State of Tamilnadu

K.Nagarajan Vs The State of Tamil Nadu