Dismissed

C. Krishnamurthy v. the Commr. Hr & Ce

Madras HC8 May 2017WP/30136/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition filed by C. Krishnamurthy seeking a direction to resume duty as a Ticket Collector, the single judge dismissed the petition. The court held that the petitioner's grievances were redressed by a Government order dated 04.02.2009 permitting reinstatement and promotion to Clerk. As the relief was already granted, the writ petition was dismissed with no costs.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to resume duty and be paid wages.

C. Krishnamurthy Vs the Commr. Hr & Ce — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 08.05.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

¶5

W.P.No.30136 of 2003

¶6

C.Krishnamurthy .. Petitioner vs.

¶7

1. The Commissioner, H.R& C.E. Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 34. 2. The Trustee (Fit person) Arulmighu Mundakaniyamman Koil, Mylapore, Chennai 4. 3. The Executive Officer, Arulmighu Mundakaniyamman Koil, Mylapore,Chennai. .. Respondents

¶8

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to resume duty as a Ticket Collector at Arulmighu Mundakkakanni Amman Temple, Chennai 4 and pay the wages.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.T.S.Baskaran

¶10

For R1 : Mr.M.Maharaja

¶11

Spl.Govt.Pleader.(HR&CE)

¶12

For R2 and R3 : Ms.Hemalatha

¶13

It is represented by the learned Special Government Pleader that the prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to permit the petitioner to resume duty of Ticket Collector in Aulmighu Mundakkakanni Amman Temple, Chennai 4.

¶14

As per the proceedings issued by the Principal Secretary /Commissioner, H.R.& C.E. Department dated 04.02.2009, the writ petitioner viz.,C.Krishnamurthy was permitted to resume

¶15

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

¶16

duty as Ticket Collector and further promoted to the post of Clerk and therefore, the grievances of the petitioner advanced in this writ petition was redressed and nothing survives for adjudication in this petition.

¶17

Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

¶18

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS II)

¶19

//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
kkd
To
1. The Commissioner,
H.R& C.E.
Nungambakkam High Road,
Chennai 34.
2. The Trustee (Fit person)
Arulmighu Mundakaniyamman Koil,
Mylapore, Chennai 4.
3. The Executive Officer,
Arulmighu Mundakaniyamman Koil,
Mylopore. Chennai.
+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.36896
W.P.No.30136 of 2003
kji(co)
rmp(17/05/17)

¶20

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

C. Krishnamurthy v. the Commr. Hr & Ce

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C. Krishnamurthy v. the Commr. Hr & Ce

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.G.Rajendran Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

G.Vijayan Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

J.Antony Xavier Vs the Govt of Tamilnadu Rep

K.Muralidharan, Vs the District Collector

K.Perumal Vs the Special Tahsildar

V.Ramaswamy, Vs The Managing Director