Disposed

S.Umamaheswari v. The Principal secretary

Madras HC26 Sept 2019WP/17570/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras, without expressing an opinion on merits, directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 16.10.2018 concerning her promotion grievance and pass orders within eight weeks. The writ petition was disposed of with no costs.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondents to consider the representation dated 16.10.2018 and pass orders within eight weeks.

S.Umamaheswari Vs The Principal secretary — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 26.09.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE M. DHANDAPANI

¶5

W.P.No.17570 of 2019

¶6

S.Umamaheswari

¶7

... Petitioner vs 1 The Principal Secretary /Chairman and Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Small Industries Corporation Limited, Guindy, Chennai-32 2 The General Manager Tamil Nadu Small Industries Corporation Limited, Guindy, Chennai-32 ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1 st and 2nd Respondent to consider the Petitioner's representation dated 16-10-2018 in respect of promotion from the post of Pharmacist to Superintendent (Manufacturing) with scale of pay of Rs.15600-39100 and Grade Pay of Rs.5400 within a specified period.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.A. Palaniappan For Respondents : Ms.Usha Rani

¶9

ORDER

¶10

This petition has been filed seeking for a direction to the 1^st and 2^nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 16-10-2018 in respect of promotion from the post of Pharmacist to Superintendent (Manufacturing) with scale of pay of Rs.15600-39100 and Grade Pay of Rs.5400 within a specified period.

¶11

2.It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had applied in the Employment Exchange for job. In pursuant to her application, she received a letter dated 25.11.2009 from the respondent Company to attend the interview for the post of

¶12

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

¶13

Pharmacist. The 1^st respondent had passed Provisional Appointment vide order dated 20.01.2010 to the petitioner, as her name was to be endorsed as the expert staff in the drugs license of the respondent Company. Then it was made permanent on 25.03.2010 by the 1^st respondent as her name was endorsed in the drugs license of the respondent Company vide order dated 05.03.2010 of the Director of Drugs Control. Thereafter, the 1^st respondent passed an order dated 13.07.2012 stating that the retiring Superintendent Manufacturing, B.Dhanusu, will hand over all his responsibilities for the above post to the petitioner. The petitioner is performing all the additional works without any additional benefits till date.

¶14

3.The 1^st respondent had promoted the juniors of the petitioner, Foreman Grade II to Foreman Grade I, through proceedings dated 27.07.2016/18.08.2016, while the petitioner was made to be stagnated in the same post of Pharmacist. Hence, the petitioner made representations to the 1^st respondent stating her grievance on her stagnation in the same post for more than a decade but the same was not considered by the respondents. Hence, she has filed this Writ Petition.

¶15

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that it would be suffice to issue directions to the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 16.10.2018 and pass orders.

¶16

5.The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents conceded to the limited request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶17

6.Without expressing any opinion on merits of the case and considering the limited request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court directs the respondents to consider the representation dated 16.10.2018 submitted by the petitioner and pass orders within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶18

With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶19

Sd/Assistant Registrar

¶20

//True Copy//

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶22

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

¶23

mps

¶24

To
1 The Principal Secretary
/Chairman and Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu Small Industries Corporation Limited,
Guindy, Chennai-32.
2 The General Manager
Tamil Nadu Small Industries Corporation
Limited, Guindy, Chennai-32.
+1cc to M/s.A.Palaniappan, Advocate Sr.83139
+1cc to M/s.V.Usharani, Advocate Sr.83453
W.P.No.17570 of 2019
cp[co]
srg 18/02/2020

¶25

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

S.Umamaheswari v. The Principal secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Umamaheswari v. The Principal secretary

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

V.Kumar Vs Metropolitan Transport Corporation

V.Kandasamy Vs State of Tamil Nadu

Dr.S.P.Subramanian Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

M.Jayaraj Vs The District Manager

S.rajamanickam Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

V.Chandran Vs The Registrar