Disposed

A.Arulraj v. The Secretary to Government

Madras HC7 Sept 2017WP/8827/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition seeking a direction to consider the petitioner's claim for promotion from Cook to Tutor-cum-Warden. The Court directed respondents to consider representations and proposals and pass orders within twelve weeks without adjudicating merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to consider representations and proposals regarding promotion and pass orders within twelve weeks.

A.Arulraj Vs The Secretary to Government — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED :07.09.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

¶5

W.P.No.8827 of 2016

¶6

A. Arulraj .. Petitioner

¶7

vs
1.The Secretary to Government,
BC, MBC & Minority Welfare Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai-9.
2.The District BC & MBC Welfare Department,
Chepauk, Chennai-5.
3.The District BC & MBC Welfare Officer,
Tuticorin District, Tuticorin. .. Respondents

¶8

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction in the nature of the Writ by directing the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for promotion as Tutor-cum-Warden with effect from the date of the qualification acquired by the petitioner in the light of the proposal sent by the 3^rd respondent in his Na.Ka.BC1/33095/13 dated 25.09.2015 within a reasonable time.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr. M. Muthappan

¶10

The relief sought for in this writ petition is for a direction to direct the respondents to consider the claim of the writ petitioner for promotion to the post of Tutor-cum-Warden on the proposal submitted by the third respondent in proceedings dated 25.09.2015.

¶11

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

¶12

The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner made a submission that the writ petitioner is now working as Cook and he is qualified for promotion to the post of Tutorcum-Warden. In this regard, the writ petitioner made representations on 19.09.2013, 18.11.2013 and on 14.11.2014 respectively. The third respondent also sent a proposal to the second respondent, recommending the claim of the writ petitioner for appointment to the post of 'Tutor-cum-Warden', in spite of this, no action has been taken by the respondents.

¶13

Thus, without going into the merits of the case, the second respondent is directed to consider the representations submitted by the writ petitioner on 19.09.2013, 18.11.2013 and on 14.11.2014 respectively, along with the proposal sent by the third respondent in proceedings dated 25.09.2015 and pass orders, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶14

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.
However, there shall be no order as to costs.
-s/d-
Assistant Registrar
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
rpl
To
1.The Secretary to Government,
BC, MBC & Minority Welfare Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai-9.

¶15

2.The District BC & MBC Welfare Department, Chepauk, Chennai-5. 3.The District BC & MBC Welfare Officer, Tuticorin District, Tuticorin. +1 CC to Mr. M. Muthappan Advocate Sr.No.65139 +1 CC to Government Pleader, High Court, Chennai Sr.No.65402 W.P.No.8827 of 2016

¶16

CSP(CO) KP(11.10.2017)

¶17

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

A.Arulraj v. The Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Arulraj v. The Secretary to Government

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

A.Joshua Gnanapalam Vs The Director of School

N. Devaraj Vs Murugesan

A Jayalakshmi Vs Mrs D Sabitha IAS

S.Venkatachalapathy, Vs The Managing Director

A.Peer Mohamed Vs The Secretary

A.Selvam, S/o.v.Anandan Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu