Disposed

C.Raja Gandhi v. the Tamil Nadu State Marketing

Madras HC22 Aug 2017WP/19751/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the Court directed the Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation to consider the petitioner's representation regarding service reinstatement on merits and pass an order within two months. The petition itself was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 15.11.2011 and pass orders on merits within two months.

C.Raja Gandhi Vs the Tamil Nadu State Marketing — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 22.08.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN

W.P.No.19751 of 2012

C.Raja Gandhi

.. Petitioner

Vs.

The Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corpn.

¶10

Ltd., (TASMAC) rep. by its

¶11

District Manager, Tiruppur,

¶12

Tiruppur District.

¶13

.. Respondent

¶14

Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to forthwith reinstate the petitioner in service as a Bar Attender in the TASMAC shop by considering and passing orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 15.11.2011.

¶15

For Petitioner .. Mr.K.Selvaraj

¶16

For Respondent .. Mr.B.Nedunchezhian

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following relief:

¶19

to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to forthwith reinstate the petitioner in service as a Bar Attender in the TASMAC shop by considering and passing orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 15.11.2011.

¶20

2.The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Bar Attender vide appointment letter dated 29.11.2013. According to the petitioner, he was stopped from service from March, 2006. According to him, without affording any opportunity, his services came to be terminated.

¶21

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

¶22

3.When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner would be satisfied if his representation dated 15.11.2011 addressed to the respondent is considered and disposed of on merits and in accordance with law. Taking note of his submission and considering the plea of limited direction being sought from this Court, there shall be a direction to the respondent to consider of the representation of the petitioner dated 15.11.2011 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶23

4.With the above direction, the writ petition stands
disposed of. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS III)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
The District Manager,
Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corpn.
Ltd., (TASMAC), Tiruppur,
Tiruppur District.
W.P.No.19751 of 2012
PPA(CO)
SS(5/10/2017)

¶24

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

C.Raja Gandhi v. the Tamil Nadu State Marketing

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.Raja Gandhi v. the Tamil Nadu State Marketing

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

The Management of M/S. S & S Vs the Presiding Officer

M. Kamaldass Vs Diwakar

P.Panchavarnam Vs the Tahsildar

S.Senthilkumar, Vs the Tamil Nadu State Marketing

S.Poornachandran, Vs the Director of Family Welfare

T.Nagarajan Vs the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies