Dismissed

L. Letchumikanthan v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC14 Mar 2017WP(MD)/4223/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench dismissed this writ petition as infructuous. The respondents submitted that disciplinary proceedings had concluded with a final punishment order, rendering the petition stale. The court allowed the petitioner to challenge the final punishment separately.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition was dismissed as infructuous. Connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.

L. Letchumikanthan Vs the State of Tamil Nadu — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 14.03.2017

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.4223 of 2014 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2014

¶7

L.Letchumikanthan ... Petitioner Vs.

¶8

The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Secretary, Department of School Education, Secretariat, Chennai – 09.

¶9

The Director of School Education, Directorate of School Education, Chennai – 06.

¶10

The Joint Director of School Education, Directorate of School Education, Chennai – 06.

¶11

The Chief Educational Officer, Pudukkottai, Pudukkottai District.

¶12

The Chief Educational Officer, Trichy, Trichy District. ... Respondents

¶13

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned charge memo passed by the 3^rd respondent in Na.Ka.No.120223/W2/E3/08 dated 03.03.2009 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 4 to award all service and monetary benefits to the petitioner from 10.12.2008 within a stipulated time.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.B.S.Meltiue For Respondents : Mr.N.S. Karthikeyan, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Additional Government Pleader,

¶15

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the charge memo issued by the 3^rd respondent in Na.Ka.No.120223/W2/E3/08 dated 03.03.2009 and for a consequential direction, directing the respondents 1 to 4 to award all service and monetary benefits to the petitioner from 10.12.2008, within a stipulated time.

¶18

When the matter is taken up for hearing, it represented by the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents that pursuant to the charge memo, dated 10.12.2008, the Disciplinary Proceedings has culminated in passing a final order of punishment of censure and therefore, this Writ Petition has become infructuous.

¶19

In view of the said submission, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. However, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the order passed by the third respondent, if he desires so. No Costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

Assitant Registrar(P&A) /True copy/

¶22

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶23

¶24

The Secretary To Government, State of Tamil Nadu Department of School Education,

¶25

Secretariat, Chennai – 09.

¶26

The Director of School Education, Directorate of School Education, Chennai – 06.

¶27

The Joint Director of School Education, Directorate of School Education, Chennai – 06.

¶28

The Chief Educational Officer, Pudukkottai, Pudukkottai District.

¶29

The Chief Educational Officer, Trichy, Trichy District.

¶30

order made in W.P.(MD) No.4223 of 2014 14.03.2017

¶31

PM/KM

¶32

AAM-SKN RSK/22.03.2017 2P 6c

¶33

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

L. Letchumikanthan v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

L. Letchumikanthan v. the State of Tamil Nadu

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

M/S.Bhavanji Mills Vs the Assistant Commissioner

M/S.Bhavanji Mills Vs the Assistant Commissioner

M/S.Bhavanji Mills Vs the Assistant Commissioner

M.Chitra, Vs the District Collector

C. Subburayan Vs the Additional Secretary/

K.Deivendran Vs the Additional Chief Secretary