Disposed

K.Ravikumar v. the Charman, Vellalar Grama

Madras HC16 Jun 2017WP/8264/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

1st respondent bank to consider petitioner's 1993 representation on promotion. Petitioner to submit fresh grievance within two weeks. Writ petition disposed. Relies on existing promotion status to prevent demand hassle. Appeal to submit fresh representation regardless.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to submit fresh representation within 2 weeks for consideration within 8 weeks. Writ petition disposed. No costs.

K.Ravikumar Vs the Charman, Vellalar Grama — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 16.06.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM

¶5

W.P.No.8264 of 2003

¶6

K.Ravikumar ...Petitioner

¶7

Versus
1.The Chairman,
Vallalar Grama Bank,
(a unit of Public Sector undertaking Government of India),
Head Office, 33-B Siva Complex,
Imperial Road, Cuddalore -2.
2.The Board of Directors,
Vallalar Grama Bank,
rep. by its Chairman,
Head Office, 33-B Siva Complex,
Imperial Road, Cuddalore -2.
3.Smt.S.Ambujavalli,
Vallalar Grama Bank,
Ponruti, Cuddalore District. .. Respondents
Prayers: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Certioraified
Mandamus to call for all relevant records relating to the
impugned circular No.PRNL/60/2002-03, dated 15.11.2002 issued by
the Chairman, Vallalar Grama Bank, Head Office, No.33-B, Siva
Complex, Imperial Road, Cuddalore -2, the 1st respondent herein
and quash the impugned order in respect of 3rd respondent herein
alone the same as arbitrary, unreasonable, illegal, improper,
against the rules and regulations of the respondent and thereby
directing the respondents 1 and 2 to promote the petitioner to
the post of Officer Scale-I under the 1st respondent and place
him in the appropriate place above his juniors (3rd respondent)
with all consequential and other monetary benefits, which are
entitled by the petitioner.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Srinivasan For Respondents : Ms.Rita Chandrasekar

¶9

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

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

The petitioner has filed this writ petition to call for all the relevant records relating to the impugned circular No.PRNL/60/2002-03, dated 15.11.2002 issued by the 1st respondent herein and quash the impugned order in respect of 3rd respondent herein alone as the same is arbitrary, unreasonable, illegal, improper, against the rules and regulations of the respondent and thereby direct the respondents 1 and 2 to promote the petitioner to the post of Officer Scale-I under the 1st respondent and place him in the appropriate place above his junior (3rd respondent) with all consequential and other monetary benefits, which are entitled to the petitioner.

¶12

Mr.S.Srinivasan, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that he sent a letter to the petitioner on 21.02.2017 for getting instruction, which returned with endorsement "no such addressee". The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that it is suffice to direct the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 29.01.2003.

¶13

The learned counsel for the first respondent would submit that the petitioner was already promoted as Scale I Officer on 06.05.2006, and on 03.02.2014 he was promoted as Scale II Officer. As such, he is now working as Scale II Officer in the first respondent bank. So, the Writ petition itself has become infructuous.

¶14

However, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is permitted to give a fresh representation to the first respondent, if he has any grievance, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such compliance, the first respondent shall consider the same on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks, therefrom.

¶15

With the above observation and direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶16

Assistant Registrar(CO)

¶17

//True Copy//

¶18

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶19

pvs

¶20

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

¶21

¶22

1.The Chairman,

¶23

Vallalar Grama Bank,

¶24

(a unit of Public Sector undertaking Government of India), Head Office, 33-B Siva Complex, Imperial Road, Cuddalore -2.

¶25

2.The Board of Directors, Vallalar Grama Bank, rep. by its Chairman, Head Office, 33-B Siva Complex, Imperial Road, Cuddalore -2. +1cc to Mr.Aiyar & Dolia, Advocate SR.No.42680 W.P.No.8264 of 2003

¶26

NRJK(CO) GN(24/07/2017)

¶27

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

K.Ravikumar v. the Charman, Vellalar Grama

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Ravikumar v. the Charman, Vellalar Grama

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

P. Balamurugan Vs the Superintendent of Police

M/S.Holy Cross College Vs the Registrar

Kalloorani Kshathriya Vs the District Educational

K.Marimuthu Vs the Chairman, Vallalar Grama

R.Subitha Vs Panchayat Inspector cum

M.Ganesan Vs the Special Commissioner &