Dismissed

S.Joseph, S/O.Selvaraj, v. the Managing Director

Madras HC28 Aug 2017WP(MD)/16096/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge Air Wing Bench dismissed a writ petition under Article 226 challenging an order treating suspension as leave. The court held that ignorance of law bars condonation of a 3.5-year delay and directed the petitioner to approach the Labour Court instead.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; directions to approach Labour Court; connected petition closed.

S.Joseph, S/O.Selvaraj, Vs the Managing Director — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 28.08.2017 CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA

¶4

W.P(MD)No.16096 of 2017 and W.M.P.(MD)No.12787 of 2017

S.Joseph

: Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Managing Director,

¶9

Head office,

¶10

Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Limited, Bye Pass Road, Madurai 625 016.

¶11

2.The General Manager,

¶12

Madurai Region,

¶13

Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Limited, Bye Pass Road, Madurai 625 016.

3.T.Kumaresan

4.S.Natarajan

5.P.Arivanandam

: Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records in connected with impugned order onathu/D2/Pura/1431 dated 31.12.2013 passed by the third respondent and quash the same as illegal, null and void and consequently directing the second respondent to consider the three days of suspension on me as duty days and to pay all the monetary benefit and directing the first respondent to take appropriate action against the erring officers as third, fourth and fifth respondents and grant me suitable compensation for the mental agony caused to me.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Joseph Party-in-Person

¶20

By consent of both sides, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

¶21

2.The present writ petition is directed against the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ impugned order dated 31.12.2013 passed by the General Manager, Madurai Region, in and by which the period of suspension from 09.11.2012 to 22.11.2012 was treated as leave without salary.

¶22

¶23

3.Mr.S.Joseph who appeared as party-in-person submitted that he is ignorant of law, however, he has been prosecuting the matter from Labour Officer and Labour Court. The petitioner has not been properly advised to approach this Court and hence a delay of 3 1/2 years had occurred. Ignorant of law cannot be a ground for entertaining this writ petition by condoning the delay of 3 1/2 years. Therefore, this Court is unable to entertain this writ petition for the reason that against the order dated 31.12.2013, the petitioner should approach the Labour Court which he has not done. Secondly, in view of unacceptable long delay, this Court is unable to entertain this writ petition.

¶24

4.For the aforementioned reasons, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

Assistant Registrar(RTI)

¶27

/True Copy/

¶28

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶29

¶30

+2cc to M/S.S.Joseph, Party-in-Person, SR.No. 74739

¶31

W.P.(MD)No.16096 of 2017

¶32

28.08.2017

¶33

MRN/MR

¶34

JM/SV MMS/SAR 2/10.10.2017/2P/3C

¶35

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

S.Joseph, S/O.Selvaraj, v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Joseph, S/O.Selvaraj, v. the Managing Director

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

S.Muthuramalingam Vs the District Collector

Rajesh Kannan, Vs the District Collector

M/S. Thiruvai Traders, Vs the Assistant Commissioner(Ct)

K.Pasumpon, Vs the Assistant Engineer

K.Savadammal Vs the District Collector

S.Ravichandran, Vs State of Tamilnadu Represented