Disposed

B.Rajkumar, v. The Managing Director

Madras HC9 Mar 2018WP/5316/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition was filed seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation to grant a non-recovery education loan of Rs. 3,27,400 to the petitioner from his provident fund. The petitioner, a Junior Assistant, cannot afford his sons' college fees.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondent to consider the application based on seniority if a list exists; otherwise to pass orders expeditiously.

B.Rajkumar, Vs The Managing Director — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 09.03.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA

¶5

W.P.No.5316 of 2018

¶6

B.Rajkumar .. Petitioner

¶7

-vs1. The Managing Director Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation (Coimbatore) Limited Coimbatore 641 043 2. The Assistant Manager Provident Fund Section Head Office Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation (Coimbatore) Limited Coimbatore 641 043 .. Respondents

¶8

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to grant non-recovery education loan of Rs.3,27,400/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Twenty Seven Thousand Four Hundred only) from petitioner's provident fund bearing account No.B02521 based on his representation and application dated 13.09.2017 within the period stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.

¶9

For Petitioner: Mr.R.Murali

¶10

For Respondents: Mr.R.S.Selvam

¶11

Standing Counsel ORDER

¶12

The petitioner was recruited as a Junior Assistant in the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Coimbatore) Limited on 28.12.94 and since then, he has been continously discharging his service with utmost care and diligence. As he has got two sons, namely, B.R.Abhishek and B.R.Vignesh who are pursuing their under graduation in Bachelor of Engineering at Sri Krishna College of Technology, he is unable to pay the college fees of Rs.3,27,400/-. However, by raising private loan from his friends and family members, he managed to pay the college fees. Subsequently, he has given a representation on 13.9.2017 to the second respondent along with the application form requesting to provide with non-recovery education loan of Rs.3,27,400/- from

¶13

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

¶14

his provident fund account bearing No.B02521. Though the said application was received by the second respondent on 15.9.2017, it is pleaded that till date, no order has been passed. Therefore, a direction be issued that would not only help the petitioner's family to get rid of the financial crisis, but also would benefit the petitioner's sons to complete the engineering course from the college.

¶15

Mr.R.S.Selvam, learned standing counsel for the respondents submitted that the application of the petitioner would be considered on the basis of seniority.

¶16

Accordingly, this Court observes that if any seniority
list is maintained in respect of the disbursement of non-
recovery educational loan, the second respondent shall consider
the application of the petitioner on the basis of seniority. If
there is no seniority list, then the petitioner's application
shall be considered forthwith by the second respondent and
appropriate orders shall be passed thereon as expeditiously as
possible. With this observation, the writ petition stands
disposed of. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VII)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
ss
To
1. The Managing Director
Tamilnadu State Transport
Corporation (Coimbatore) Limited
Coimbatore 641 043
2. The Assistant Manager
Provident Fund Section
Head Office
Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation
(Coimbatore) Limited
Coimbatore 641 043
+1cc to Mr.R.Murali, Advocate, S.R.No.18204
+1cc to Mr.R.S.Selvam,Govt Advocate, S.R.No.18256

¶17

W.P.No.5316 of 2018

¶18

ev(CO) GSP(26/03/2018)

¶19

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

B.Rajkumar, v. The Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Rajkumar, 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

K. Rajesh Vs The Director General of

R.Palanisamy, Vs The Managing Director

Miss.Leemaroslien Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

S.Kanagasundaram, Vs The District Collector

S.Arumugaselvi Vs The Director of Medical

The Managing Director, Vs The Presiding Officer