Disposed

R.Vajjravelu v. The District Collector

Madras HC23 Oct 2017WP/20581/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition seeks a direction under Article 226 to compel respondents to consider the petitioner's representation regarding the settlement of pension and service benefits. The court directed the respondents to decide the issue on merits within twelve weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed first respondent to consider petitioner's representation and pass orders on merits within twelve weeks of receipt of the order.

R.Vajjravelu Vs The District Collector — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 23-10-2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

W.P.No.20581 of 2014

R.Vajjravelu

.. Petitioner

-vs-

1.The District Collector, Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur.

¶10

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruttani Division, Thiruvallur District. .. Respondents

¶11

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 12.3.2014 forwarded to the first respondent by the Honourable Chief Minister's Special Cell and pass appropriate orders within a reasonable time settling the pension and other service benefits and entitlements for the services rendered till 30.9.2004.

¶12

For Petitioner - Mr.P.Seshadri

¶13

For Respondents - Mrs.K.Bhuvaneswari,

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The relief sought for in this writ petition is for a direction to direct the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the writ petitioner on 12.3.2014, which was forwarded to the first respondent.

¶16

The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner made a submission that the writ petitioner was working as Village Karnam with effect from 30.11.1971 till 14.11.1980. Further, the petitioner was reappointed as Part-Time Panchayat Assistant from 1.1.1991 and continued in the said post till 13.3.1997. Again the writ petitioner was appointed as Village Administrative Officer on regular basis with effect from https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶17

28.4.1997 and posted at S.P.Vadugapalaym Village, Palladam Taluk, North Arcot District.

¶18

The writ petitioner served in the post of Village Administrative Officer till 30.6.2000. Thereafter, he was transferred to Santhanagopalapuram Village in the same Division till 30.9.2004 and retired from service. However, the retirement benefits, including GPF and other consequential benefits are not settled in favour of the writ petitioner. In this regard, the writ petitioner has submitted a representation on 12.3.2014, which was already forwarded to the first respondent.

¶19

Thus, without going into the merits of the matter, the first respondent is directed to consider the representation submitted by the writ petitioner on 12.3.2014 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petitioner is directed to enclose the copy of the representation and other documents, to the first respondent along with the order passed in this writ petition.

¶20

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.
However, there shall be no order as to costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS IV)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
svn
To
1.The District Collector,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Tiruttani Division,
Thiruvallur District.
+1cc to Mr.P.Seshadri, Advocate, S.R.No.75024
WP 20581 of 2014
GN(06/11/2017)

¶21

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

R.Vajjravelu v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Vajjravelu v. The District Collector

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

M.Vignesh Vs the Chairman

N.D.Palani, Vs the Deputy Registrar of Coop.

A.Thiruganasambandam Vs Tamilnadu Generation and

I.Tharani Vs The Teacher Recruitment Board

P.Rajkumar Vs The Government of Tamilnadu

P.Sivakumar Vs The District Manager