Disposed

B.Arunkumar, v. State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC26 Sept 2018WA(MD)/1298/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Writ Appeal challenged the dismissal of a petition contesting a suspension order against the appellant. The court declined to interfere on merits or jurisdiction, but permitted the appellant to request the respondents to review the suspension within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Permitted appellant to make a request to respondents seeking review of the order of suspension within four weeks.

B.Arunkumar, Vs State of Tamil Nadu — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 26.09.2018

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR W.A.(MD)No.1298 of 2018 and

¶5

C.M.P.(MD)No.9196 of 2018

¶6

B.Arunkumar

¶7

: Appellant/Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

State of Tamil Nadu,

¶10

Represented by its Secretary to Government,

¶11

School Education Department, Secretariat,

¶12

Fort St. George,

¶13

Chennai-9.

¶14

The Director of Elementary Education, College Road,

¶15

Chennai-6.

¶16

The Chief Educational Officer,

¶17

Dindigul-I.

¶18

: Respondents

¶19

PRAYER: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order of Writ Court dated 04.09.2018 made in W.P.(MD) No.18870 of 2018.

¶20

Prayer in WP(MD)NO. 18870 OF 2018 :

¶21

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the orders passsed by the 3rd respondent in R.C.No.3060/D1/2017 dated 27/08/2018 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to discharge his duties as Block Educational Office, Guziliamparai forthwith.

¶22

For Appellant : Mr.S.Louis For Respondents : Mr.A.K.Baskarapandian, Special Government Pleader

¶23

J U D G M E N T

¶24

¶25

[ Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.]

¶26

Challenging the order of suspension, the appellant filed https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the Writ Petition. As the Writ Petition was dismissed, the present Writ Appeal has been filed.

¶27

¶28

The learned counsel for the appellant has raised two contentions, one is with respect to the jurisdiction to pass the impugned order and the other is on merit to the effect that the defacto complainant has undertaken before this Court to withdraw the complaint.

¶29

On both the grounds, we are not inclined to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge. Admittedly, as per the Government Order, as recorded by the learned Single Judge, the third respondent, who passed the impugned order, has got jurisdiction. At this stage, we are not supposed to go into the merits of the case. Therefore, the second contention also fails. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, especially, in the light of the order passed by this Court at the time of granting anticipatory bail in favour of the defacto complainant, we permit the appellant to make a request to the respondents seeking review of the order of suspension. As and when such a request is made, the same will have to be considered, within a period of four weeks, without being influenced by any observation made by us as well as by the learned Single Judge.

¶30

The Writ Appeal stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, the connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

Assistant Registrar(CO)

¶33

/True Copy/

¶34

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-I)

¶35

¶36

The Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu, School Education Department, Secretariat, Fort St. George,

¶37

Chennai-9.

¶38

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

¶39

The Chief Educational Officer, Dindigul-I.

¶40

+2cc to Mr.S.Louis, Advocate Sr.No.86687,87495 SML

¶41

VB/SKN/SAR1/10.10.2018/2P/6C

¶42

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

¶43

Judgment made in W.A.(MD)No.1298 of 2018 Dated : 26.09.2018

B.Arunkumar, v. State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Arunkumar, v. 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

R. Mahesh Vs the Inspector of Police

Abbas Maraikayar Vs the Inspector of Police

Uma @ R.M.Shanmugapriya Vs the Director General of Police

Muthuraj, Vs the Commissioner

The Management of Vs T.Veerakumar

Jayabal Vs the Superintendent of Police