A writ petition under Article 226 sought a mandamus directing the Technical Education Commissioner to consider a representation for revising pay and pension and refunding wrongly collected funds. The court directed the respondent to act within four weeks without expressing an opinion on merits and disposed of the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 06.03.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR
W.P.(MD).No.3879 of 2017
N.Narashimhan .. Petitioner
Vs.
Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.
The Commissioner of Technical Education, Guindy, Chennai. .. Respondents
PRAYER: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to consider and pass orders on petitioner's representation, dated 28.11.2016 to revise pay and pension as Rs.8,000/- - Rs.15,600/- to be refixed and to refund Rs.35,378/which was wrongly recovered from him to disburse DCRG benefits and surrender leave benefits as per G.O.Ms.No.111, dated 25.05.2010 and to pass such further orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Veilkani Raju
For Respondents : Mr.J.Gunaseelan Muthaiah
Government Advocate
O R D E R
This Writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to consider and pass orders on petitioner's representation, dated 28.11.2016 to revise pay and pension as Rs.8,000/- - Rs.15,600/to be refixed and to refund Rs.35,378/- which was wrongly recovered from him to disburse DCRG benefits and surrender leave benefits as per G.O.Ms.No.111, dated 25.05.2010.
2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.
2
4.Having regard to the limited scope of prayer in the Writ petition, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, this Court direct the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 28.11.2016, regarding the revision of pay and pension and for the refund of the money which was wrongly collected from the petitioner and to pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
sd/ Assistant Registrar
/True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The Secretary, Higher Education Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009. 2. The Commissioner, The Commissioner of Technical Education, Guindy, Chennai. +1CC TO M/S.SIDDHARTHAN, Advocate,SR.NO.12511 +1CC TO SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER,SR.NO.12628 ORDER MADE IN W.P.(MD).No.3879 of 2017 06.03.2017 JM/CM MSA/13.03.2017/2P/5C
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should direct the Technical Education Commissioner to consider the petitioner's representation regarding the revision of pay, pension, and refund of wrongly collected money.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
N. Narashimhan
The Secretary, Higher Education Department, Government of Tamil Nadu
The Commissioner, The Commissioner of Technical Education, Guindy, Chennai
S. S. Sundar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
