Allowed

Alagarsamy v. Rajarathinam

Madras HC23 Oct 2019CMSA(MD)/17/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against a transfer order was pending. The court suggested to counsel that a workable arrangement would be made. Upon agreement by the appellant to be accommodated in a different district, the court directed the first respondent to continue functioning temporarily and disposed of the appeal, vacating the order below.

What did the court decide?

Writ Appeal disposed of; finding of Single Bench vacated; First Respondent to continue functioning at Pudukkottai for two weeks; Appellant to be accommodated in Amaravathy.

Alagarsamy Vs Rajarathinam — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

W.A.(MD)No.1199 of 2019

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 22.11.2019 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM

¶4

and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.THARANI W.A.(MD)No.1199 of 2019 and C.M.P(MD).No.10371 of 2019

¶5

The Principal Secretary to Government, Co-operation, Food and Consumer Protection Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai-9.

¶6

... Appellant

¶7

Vs.

¶8

M.Uma Maheswari Joint Registrar/Managing Director, Tiruchirappalli District Central Co-operatie Bank Ltd., No.2, Kottai Station Road, Tiruchirapalli-620 002.

¶9

2. Dhanalakshmi

¶10

Joint Registrar/Managing Director, Trichirappalli Central Co-operative Bank Ltd.

¶11

... Respondents

¶12

(second respondent was impleaded vide Court order dated 08.11.2019 made in W.A(MD).No.1199 of 2019)

¶13

PRAYER : Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 25.10.2019 made in W.P(MD).No.21510 of 2019 and W.M.P(MD).No.18171, 19617 and 19625 of 2019.

¶14

Prayer in WP(MD)21510/2019

¶15

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the respondent relating to G.O.(Valayam)No.229, Cooperation, Food and Consumer Protection (CE1) Department, dated 23.10.2019, quash the same insofar as the transfer of the petitioner is concerned, and a direction to the respondent to post the petitioner in the post of Joint Registrar/Managing Director, Tiruchirappalli District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Tiruchirappalli, until the completion of three years from 04.07.2018.

¶16

For Appellant : Mr.K.Chellapandian Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.A.Muthukaruppan Additional Government Pleader For Respondents : Mr.M.Vallinayagam Senior Counsel (for R1) Mr.G.Karnan (for R2)

¶17

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

¶18

1/2

¶19

W.A.(MD)No.1199 of 2019

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

[Judgment of this Court was made by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J. ]

¶22

We have heard Mr.K.Chellapandian, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the appellant, Mr.M.Vallinayagam, learned Senior Counsel appearing for first respondent and Mr.G.Karnan, learned counsel appearing for second respondent.

¶23

2.The order impugned in this writ petition is an order of transfer, which under normal circumstances cannot be interfered, because there is no specific allegation of malafide . However, taking note of certain difficulties, which were expressed by the appellant and the newly impleaded second respondent, we suggested to the learned Additional Advocate General to make a workable arrangement, when we heard the matter on 21.11.2019, on the said date, we made it clear that if no workable arrangement is visible, Court will be inclined to dismiss the writ appeal.

¶24

3.The learned Additional Advocate General after discussing with the authorities has reported about a modality and submitted that the respondent will be accommodated in Amaravathy District Co-operative Wholesale Store, Trichy.

¶25

4.In the light of the same, we direct the first respondent to accept the said arrangement and continue to function at Pudukkottai for next two weeks.

¶26

5.In the light of the above,Writ Appeal stands disposed of and consequentially the finding rendered by the learned Single Bench stand vacated. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶27

// True Copy //

¶28

+1 CC to M/s.G. KARNAN, Advocate ( SR-100851[F] dated 25/11/2019 ) +1 CC to M/s.J. ANANDKUMAR, Advocate ( SR-100880[F] dated15/11/19 +1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-101109[F] dated 25/11/2019 )

¶29

rmk

¶30

W.A.(MD)No.1199 of 2019 22.11.2019

¶31

sma/02/12/19/2p/4c

¶32

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

¶33

2/2

Alagarsamy v. Rajarathinam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alagarsamy v. Rajarathinam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Paramasiva Nadar Vs Grama Rajya Nirmana Sangam

A.R.R.Seenivasan, Vs a.R.v.Ramachandran

R.Pradeepa Vs S.Ilango

Paramasiva Kaniyan Vs Tirunelveli Municipal

Soosaimanickam Vs Mani @ Simon

M.v.P.Mariappan Vs G.Vijayarani