Disposed

M.Karuppaiah v. the Senior Regional Manager

Madras HC24 Feb 2015WP(MD)/2400/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the Madras High Court directed the Senior Regional Manager (TASMAC) to dispose of the petitioner's pending administrative appeal against termination within twelve weeks, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the termination issue.

What did the court decide?

Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the pending appeal and pass orders on merits within twelve weeks.

M.Karuppaiah Vs the Senior Regional Manager — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED:24.02.2015

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.2400 of 2015

M.Karuppaiah

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Senior Regional Manager (TASMAC), O/o.Senior Regional Manager, Old District Collector Office Campus, Trichy.

¶11

The District Manager (TASMAC), Pudukkottai, Pudukkottai District. ... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1^st respondent to dispose the appeal which was pending before him.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Subash Babu

¶14

For Respondents : Mr.M.Muniyasamy

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

Mr.M.Muniyasamy, the learned Standing Counsel takes notice for the respondents.

¶17

The petitioner seeks for a direction to the first respondent to dispose of the appeal filed by him, as against the order of termination passed by the 2^nd respondent.

¶18

It is stated that the 2^nd respondent passed the order of termination against the petitioner on 11.11.2014 and the petitioner challenged the said order before the first respondent by way of an appeal, dated 16.12.2014. It is stated that the said appeal is still pending and not yet disposed of. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶19

¶20

Considering the above said facts and circumstances, this

¶21

Court, without expressing any view on the merits of the claim made by the petitioner as against the order of termination, only directs the first respondent to consider the appeal, dated 16.12.2014 and pass orders on the same on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if the appeal is already not disposed of. No costs.

¶22

Sd/-

¶23

Assistant Registrar(C.O.,)

¶24

/True Copy/

¶25

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶26

¶27

The Senior Regional Manager (TASMAC), O/o.Senior Regional Manager,

¶28

Old District Collector Office Campus, Trichy.

¶29

The District Manager (TASMAC), Pudukkottai, Pudukkottai District.

¶30

+1cc to Mr.M.Subash Babu, Advocate, in SR. No.8364.

¶31

W.P.(MD)No.2400 of 2015 24.02.2015

¶32

MPK msm 26.02.2015 p2/4c(IT)

¶33

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

M.Karuppaiah v. the Senior Regional Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Karuppaiah v. the Senior Regional Manager

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

S.Chithra Vs the District Collector

Gunasundarraj, Vs the Principal Chief Engineer

M.Mahamuthal Vs the Secretary to the

Thiru.a. Periandy, Vs the State of Tamilnadu

N.Tamilarasan, Vs the Principal Accountant

S. Thangapandian, Vs the District Collector