Petitioner challenged Tribunal order regarding double travelling allowance start date and promotion under disability quota. Court held benefit delay justified and promotion claim not before Tribunal as not raised.
Writ petition dismissed with no costs; connected miscellaneous petition closed.
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
DATE: 13.7.2015.
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN and THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T.MATHIVANAN
W.P.No.3532 of 2015
and
M.P.No.1 of 2015
B.V.Gandhimathi Petitioner
vs.
1 D.G.O.F. and Chairman
Ordnance Factory Board
No.10A S.K.Bose Road
Kolkatta 700 001.
2 The Additional D.G.O.F
Armoured Vehicles Headquarters
Avadi Chennai 600 054.
3 Union of India
Rep. by Secretary
Ministry of Defence
Department of Defence and Production and
Supply
New Delhi.
4 The Central Administrative Tribunal
Chennai Bench
Rep. by its Registrar
High Court Compound
Chennai 600 104. Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to order dated 8.7.2014 in O.A. No.1274/2012 and RA No.53/2014 dated 1.12.2014 passed by the 4th respondent Tribunal and quash the same by allowing the said O.A and to direct respondents 1 to 3 to promote the petitioner to the Post of Assistant Staff Officer on par with her juniors and to grant TA at double the normal rates from the date of her disablement with arrears of pay and all other consequential benefits.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.V.S.Giridhar for M/S.Giridhar and Sai
For RR 1 to 3 : Mr.D.Simon
ORDER
(Order of the court was made by V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J. )
The petitioner, whose claim was partially allowed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, has come up with the above writ petition challenging one portion of the order of the Tribunal.
not from the date on which the disability was certified, we are of the considered view that there was also some delay on the part of the petitioner. Therefore, the restriction of the benefit from 2008 to the petitioner cannot be found fault with.
Sd/-
Asst.Registrar (CS II )
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
ssk.
To
1 D.G.O.F. and Chairman
Ordnance Factory Board
No.10A S.K.Bose Road
Kolkatta 700 001.
2 The Additional D.G.O.F
Armoured Vehicles Headquarters
Avadi Chennai 600 054.
3 The Secretary Union of India Ministry of Defence Department of Defence and Production and Supply New Delhi.
4 The Central Administrative Tribunal Chennai Bench Rep. by its Registrar High Court Compound Chennai 600 104.
+1 cc to M/S.Giridhar & Sai Associates sr.35453
W.P.No.3532 of 2015
kgk(co)
aa19/08/2015
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to double travelling allowance from the date of accident or date of medical certification.
Whether the Tribunal was required to consider the petitioner's claim for promotion under the 3% quota for physically disabled persons.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
B.V.Gandhimathi
D.G.O.F. and Chairman Ordnance Factory Board
Additional D.G.O.F Armoured Vehicles Headquarters
Union of India
Central Administrative Tribunal
V.Ramasubramanian
T.Mathivanan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
