Allowed

R.Charles v. the Agricultural

Madras HC5 Mar 2018WP(MD)/4561/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by an Assistant Agriculture Officer seeking extension of pay benefits under a 2010 Government Order. The Court directed the Agricultural Production Commissioner to consider the petitioner's representation and pass orders within eight weeks, without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 18.09.2015 and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks.

R.Charles Vs the Agricultural — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 05.03.2018

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.4561 of 2018

R.Charles

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Agricultural Production Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government,

¶11

Agriculture Department,

¶12

Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

¶13

The Director of Horticulture and Plantation Crops,

¶14

Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶15

The Deputy Director of Agriculture (Agri Business),

¶16

Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

¶17

... Respondents

¶18

Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the first respondent i.e., the Agricultural Production Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government, Agriculture Department, Chennai to pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's representation dated 18.09.2015 based on G.O.Ms.No.340, Finance (Pay Cell) Department dated 26.08.2010 by extending the benefits to the petitioner also, within a specified time frame that may be fixed by this Court since he was also selected earlier but joined duty belatedly due to administrative reasons.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Visvalingam For Respondents : Mr.J.Gunaseelan Muthaiah, Additional Government Pleader

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Mr.J.Gunaseelan Muthaiah, the learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents.

¶22

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2.By consent of both parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶23

¶24

3.The petitioner is presently working as a Assistant in the office of the third respondent. He seeks extension of benefits granted by G.O.Ms.No.340, Finance (Pay Cell) Department dated 26.08.2010. In this regard, the petitioner gave a representation dated 18.09.2015.

¶25

4.This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter. It is open to first respondent to pass orders one way or the other. The first respondent is directed to consider the said representation submitted by the petitioner dated 18.09.2015 and pass orders in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶26

5.This writ petition is allowed. No costs.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

Assistant Registrar (Crl.side)

¶29

/True Copy/

¶30

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶31

¶32

The Agricultural Production Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government,

¶33

Agriculture Department,

¶34

Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

¶35

The Director of Horticulture and Plantation Crops,

¶36

Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶37

The Deputy Director of Agriculture (Agri Business),

¶38

Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

¶39

- 1 CC TO SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER IN SR No. 53585

¶40

- 1 CC TO Mr.S.VISWALINGAM, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 52743

¶41

SKM

¶42

TE/SKN-RSK/SAR-1 : 26/03/2018 : 2P/6C

¶43

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

¶44

W.P(MD)No.4561 of 2018 05.03.2018

R.Charles v. the Agricultural

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Charles v. the Agricultural

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

V.Palaniyandi, Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

A.Sivanantham, Vs the Director

S.Ravi Vs the State of Tamilnadu

S.Alagaraj, Vs the General Manager/

Mohan, S/O.Arumugam, Vs the Senior Commandant

Punjab National Bank Vs the Joint Commissioner