Disposed

R.K.Venkatraman v. the Secretary to Government

Madras HC22 Jul 2015WP(MD)/12516/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madrasi Bench of Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition filed under Article 226 seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the Government to process a pension claim based on Rule 11(4) of Tamil Nadu Pension Rules. The court directed the 1st respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation within three months.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to dispose of the petitioner's representation regarding pension claim within three months after hearing.

R.K.Venkatraman Vs the Secretary to Government — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.07.2015 Coram THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN

¶3

W.P.(MD).No.12516 of 2015

¶4

R.K.VENKATRAMAN .. Petitioner

¶5

Vs.

¶6

THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,

¶7

RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYAT RAJ

¶8

DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, CHENNAI 600 009.

¶9

THE COMMISSIONER OF RURAL

¶10

DEVELOPMENT, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENTS,

¶11

SAIDAPET, CHENNAI 600 015.

¶12

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,

¶13

SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT, SIVAGANGAI. .. Respondents

¶14

Prayer: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1st respondent i.e. the Secretary to Government Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department Chennai to pass appropriate orders on the representation dated 6.6.15 of the petitioner regarding grant of pension counting half of the service put in by him in consolidated pay under Rule-11(4) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules within a specified time frame that may be fixed by this Court.

¶15

For Petitioner :Mr.R.Senthil Kumar

¶16

For Respondent :Mr.R.Velmurugan

¶17

Government Advocate

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The prayer in the Writ Petition is a Writ of Mandamus praying to direct the 1st respondent i.e. the Secretary to Government Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department Chennai to pass appropriate orders on the representation dated 6.6.15 of the petitioner regarding grant of pension counting half of the service put in by him in consolidated pay under Rule-11(4) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules within a specified time frame that may be fixed by this Court.

¶20

2.Mr.R.Velmurugan, the learned Government Advocate takes notice for the respondents and by consent of both parties, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

¶21

3.The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that it would suffice if the representation of the petitioner dated 06.06.2015 is disposed of, on merits and in accordance with law, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶22

4.In view of the limited scope of the prayer, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue involved, the respondents are directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner, dated 06.06.2015, if https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ not already disposed of, and pass appropriate orders on the same and in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of

¶23

¶24

receipt of a copy of this order, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard.

¶25

5.With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Sd/-

¶26

The Assistant Registrar(AS)

¶27

/True copy/

¶28

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶29

¶30

THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,

¶31

RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND PANCHAYAT RAJ

¶32

DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, CHENNAI 600 009.

¶33

THE COMMISSIONER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENTS, SAIDAPET, CHENNAI 600 015.

¶34

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,

¶35

SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT, SIVAGANGAI.

¶36

+1cc to M/s.R.Senthilkumar, Advocate SR.No.40008

¶37

+1cc to special Government Pleader SR.No.40357

¶38

rj2

¶39

Sm:IV:5.08.2015:2P/6C

¶40

W.P.(MD).No.12516 of 2015

¶41

22.07.2015

¶42

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

R.K.Venkatraman v. the Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.K.Venkatraman v. the Secretary to Government

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

Minor Anudharani Repd. by Vs the Secretary

K.Kasinathan Vs the Regional Manager

K.Kannathasan Vs the Registrar of Cooperative

S. Lamache, Vs the District Collector

B. Subaitha Begum, Vs the Director of Collegiate

S. Mariappan, Vs the District Collector