Disposed

M.Pandian, S/O Murugayyan, v. the Senior Regional Manager

Madras HC17 Apr 2015WP(MD)/5722/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a suspended employee seeking quashing of the suspension order and regularization. The Court directed payment of subsistence allowance and mandated initiation of disciplinary proceedings within three months or reinstatement. Connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.

What did the court decide?

Direction to pay subsistence allowance and initiate disciplinary proceedings within three months, failing which petitioner to be reinstated.

M.Pandian, S/O Murugayyan, Vs the Senior… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 17/4/2015

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN Writ Petition (MD) No.5722 of 2015 and M.P.(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2015

¶4

M. Pandian ...Petitioner

¶5

¶6

The Senior Regional Manager Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited Trichy.

¶7

The District Manager Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited Thanjavur. ...Respondents

¶8

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the second respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.7861/RV-2/2014 dated 12/11/2014 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents herein to regularise the period of suspension as on duty and pay the arrears of salary along with other attendant and monetary benefits.

¶9

For Petitioner ... Mr.Veerakathiravan For Respondents ... Mr.M.Muniyasamy Standing Counsel

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

In this writ petition, the Petitioner is aggrieved against the order of suspension.

¶12

Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶13

It is seen that the petitioner was placed under suspension by the impugned order dated 12.11.2014, based on certain allegations. Now, even after a long period, the petitioner is not either reinstated or given subsistence allowance so far. Therefore, it is the contention of the petitioner that the suspension order should be set aside.

¶14

In similar circumstances, this Court has considered and passed order in respect of similarly situated persons in W.P(MD) No.19881 of 2013 dated 10.12.2013.

¶15

Considering all the facts and circumstances, the following order is passed:

¶16

a)It is open to the respondents to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner and if any such proceedings is initiated, the same https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ shall be completed and final order shall be passed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶17

¶18

b)The petitioner shall be paid subsistence allowance from the date of suspension till the respondents passes the final orders in the disciplinary proceedings.

¶19

c)If the respondents does not initiate any disciplinary proceedings as stated supra and pass final orders within the time stipulated, the petitioner is entitled to be reinstated into service immediately thereafter.

¶20

d)If the petitioner is entitled to get subsistence allowance, the same shall be paid and the enquiry shall be conducted on day-to-day basis, and even on holidays. The petitioner shall co-operate for conclusion of enquiry within the time stipulated in this order. If he is responsible for prolonging the enquiry, he will not be entitled to the relief in para 5(c) mentioned supra.

¶21

With these directions and observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶22

Sd/Assistant Registrar(AE)

¶23

/True copy/

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶25

¶26

The Senior Regional Manager Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited Trichy.

¶27

The District Manager Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited Thanjavur.

¶28

+1cc to Mr.Veerakarhiravan, Advocate in SR.19700

¶29

W.P.(MD) No.5722 of 2015 17/4/2015

¶30

mpk pbk 13/05/2015 ::2p-4c:

¶31

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

M.Pandian, S/O Murugayyan, v. the Senior Regional Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Pandian, S/O Murugayyan, 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

A1 Mohammed Saleem, Vs State Rep. by Its Secretary

V. Sababathy Vs the Regional Transport Officer

Manimaran Vs the Managing Director

G. Samuel Sunil Dhass Vs the Director of Fisheries

R.Anbarasan, Vs the Senior Regional Manager

D. Vasantha, Vs the Accountant General