This order in a writ petition directs the School Education Department to consider a petitioner's dormant representation regarding his pension/pay scale and pass orders within 12 weeks.
Direction to the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation of 08.08.2012 and pass orders on merits within 12 weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 26.02.2018
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.(MD) No.6402 of 2013
N.Lakshmana Dass ... Petitioner
-vs-
1.The Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Secretariat,
Chennai- 600 009.
2.The Director of School Education, Directorate of School Education, Chennai-6. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to consider the Petitioner's representation, dated 8.8.2012 within the time stipulated period as may be fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : M/s.R.Sundar For Respondents : Mr.R.Sethuraman Special Govt.Pleader
O R D E R
The relief sought for in this Writ Petition is to direct the first respondent to consider the Petitioner's representation, dated 08.08.2012.
2.The grievance of the Writ Petitioner is that the scale of pay as applicable to him in the selection grade and special grade has not been fixed in accordance with the Government Orders in force. The fact remains that the Writ Petitioner was retired from service on 15.3.2000.Further, the learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the Writ Petitioner is submitting representation for many years and no reply has been given. This Court is of an opinion that if such representations are being submitted consistently, then the authorities ought to have considered the same and pass orders. But the Petitioner states that in-spite of his representations, no decision has been taken in this regard.
3.Thus, without going into the merits of the matter, the second respondent is directed to consider the representation submitted by https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the Petitioner on 08.8.2012 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of 12 weeks from the date of
2
receipt of a copy of this order. The Writ Petitioner is directed to enclose a copy of the representation and the documents, if any, along with a copy of this order to the second respondent, for further action.
4.Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
Sd/ Assistant Registrar(AS)
/True copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1.The Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Secretariat, Chennai- 600 009.
2.The Director of School Education, Directorate of School Education, Chennai-6.
+1cc to Mr.R.SUNDAR,Advocate, SR.No.51167 +1cc to M/s.Special Government Pleader,SR.No.51994
W.P.(MD) No.6402 of 2013
26.02.2018
VSN
KK/GT/13.03.2018/SAR-3/2P-5C
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the authorities are directed to consider the petitioner's outstanding representation regarding the scale of pay in selection and special grades.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
N.Lakshmana Dass
Secretary to Government, School Education Department
Director of School Education
S.M. Subramaniam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
