The Madras High Court, while disposing of a writ petition for fixation of notional pay, directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's representations and afford an opportunity of hearing before making a decision.
Direction to the 2nd respondent to consider representations and afford hearing opportunity, dispose within two months.
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.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 21.04.2015
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN
WRIT PETITION (MD) No.16791 of 2014
S.Gnanasekaran ...Petitioner
-vs-
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to disburse the arrears of monetary benefits by fixing the notional pay from 01.07.2000 from the cadre of Tahsildar under the 2nd respondent District Revenue Subordinate Service to the petitioner.
For Petitioners: Mr.S.Jeevanandham For Respondent : Mr.D.Muruganandan
Addl. Govt. Pleader
***** O R D E R
The petitioner has come forward with this writ petition, seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent to disburse the arrears of monetary benefits by fixing the notional pay from 01.07.2000 from the cadre of Tahsildar under the 2nd respondent District Revenue Subordinate Service to the petitioner.
With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar (Writs)
/True copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
2
To:
WRIT PETITION (MD) No.16791 of 2014 21.04.2015
ar pbk/sar-I 07/05/2015 ::2p-4c:
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the respondent must consider the petitioner's representations and afford an opportunity of hearing before passing an order on the plea of fixing notional pay.
What procedural direction the High Court can issue to the Revenue Department pending final disposition of the grievance.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
S.Gnanasekaran
The Principal Secretary / Commissioner of Revenue Administration
The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District
S.Vaidyanathan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
