Dismissed

Suvignanatheepam, v. the Government of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC10 Aug 2018CMP(MD)/3719/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench dismissed a civil miscellaneous petition seeking to condone an excessive delay of 2272 days in filing a writ appeal regarding salary fixation. The court held the delay unexplained and noted the impugned order was self-constitutional by subsequent departmental actions.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of delay of 2272 days refused; civil miscellaneous petition and writ appeal rejected.

Suvignanatheepam, Vs the Government of Tamil… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 10.08.2018

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

¶5

C.M.P.(MD).No.3719 of 2018

¶6

¶7

W.A.[MD].(SR)No.15080 of 2018

¶8

Suvignanatheepam : Petitioner/Appellant

¶9

Vs.

¶10

The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep by its Secretary, School Education Department,

¶11

Fort.St.George, Chennai 600 009.

¶12

The Director of Elementary Education, College Road, Chennai 6.

¶13

The District Elementary Educational Officer, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

¶14

The Correspondent, STC Branch Middle School, Ambasamuthiram, Tirunelveli District.

¶15

: Respondents/Respondents

¶16

Prayer in C.M.P(MD)No.3719 of 2018:- Petition filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, to condone the delay of 2272 days in filing Writ Appeal against the order dated 20.12.2011 made in W.P (MD).No.13018 of 2011.

¶17

Prayer in W.A.[MD].(SR)No.15080 of 2018:- Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 20.12.2011 made in W.P(MD).No.13018 of 2011, on the file of this Court.

¶18

Prayer in WP(MD). 13018/ 2011 :

¶19

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to refix the salary of the petitioner in the post of Middle School Headmistress, Special Grade by taking into account the service rendered by the Petitioner as Secondary Grade Teacher prior to 01.06.88.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Respondents 1to3 : Mrs.S.Srimathy Special Government Pleader

¶21

¶22

ORDER

¶23

[ Order of the Court was made by M.M.SUNDRESH, J. ]

¶24

Seeking to condone the delay of 2272 days in filing Writ Appeal, the petitioner has come forward with the present Civil Miscellaneous Petition.

¶25

We do not find any merit in this Civil Miscellaneous Petition. The enormous delay of 2272 days has not been properly explained. Furthermore, the order has worked itself out. The respondent authorities had already passed orders rejecting the request of the petitioner. The Civil Miscellaneous Petition is, therefore dismissed. Consequently, W.A.(MD)(SR).No.15080 of 2018 shall stand rejected. It is always open to the petitioner to challenge the said order passed by the respondent authorities, if so advised. No costs.

¶26

Sd/Assistant Registrar (CS-I)

¶27

/True Copy/

¶28

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-III)

¶29

¶30

The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep by its Secretary, School Education Department, Fort.St.George, Chennai 600 009.

¶31

The Director of Elementary Education, College Road, Chennai 6.

¶32

The District Elementary Educational Officer, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

¶33

+1cc to Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai, Advocate SR.No.78363 +1cc to Mrs.S.Srimathy, Advocate SR.No.78109 NB

¶34

MK/RP/SAR 3/27.08.2018/2P/6C

¶35

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

¶36

ORDER MADE IN C.M.P.(MD).No.3719 of 2018 IN W.A.[MD].(SR)No.15080 of 2018 10.08.2018

Suvignanatheepam, v. the Government of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suvignanatheepam, v. the Government 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

K.K.Ramesh Vs the Government of India

S. Ramprasath Vs the Commissioner of Police

S.M.Anthony Muthu, Vs the District Collector

Chitra, Vs the Superintendent of Police

Palanivel Alias Velusamy Vs the Inspector of Police

Sugapriya, Vs the Superintendent of Police