Disposed

C.Newton v. The Principal Secretary

Madras HC6 Nov 2019WP/22885/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought a direction for the Chief Educational Officer to initiate action against government employees who violated conduct rules during a church election. The Court issued the direction after dispensing with notice to private respondents.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to the fourth respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders expeditiously.

C.Newton Vs The Principal Secretary — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 06.11.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶5

W.P.No.22885 of 2019

¶6

C.Newton ... Petitioner

¶7

¶8

1. The Principal Secretary to Government School Educational Department, Fort St.George, Chennai – 9. 2. The Under Secretary to Government Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department Fort St.George, Chennai – 9. 3. The District Collector, Tiruvannamalai, Tiruvannamalai District. 4. The Chief Educational Officer, Tiruvannamalai, Tiruvannamalai District. 5.Hubert Dhanasundaram.B 6.Poonguzhali Porttamarai.S 7.Anand Baskaran.R 8.Jensi Devasena.V 9.Selvi Mary Latha.S.A. ... Respondents

¶9

Prayer:Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider and pass orders on the representation dated 21.02.2019 by issuing appropriate direction to the competent authorities under the Act to initiate action against the Government employees who were contested and elected in Arcot Lutheran Church election by violating the Tamil Nadu Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1973, Rule 23.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Edwin Jeyakumar For Respondents : Mrs.P.Kavitha for R1 and R4 Government Advocate

¶11

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

¶12

Mr.R.S.Selvam for R2 and R3 Government Advocate M/s.Srinath Sridevan for R5

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider and pass orders on the representation dated 21.02.2019 by issuing appropriate direction to the competent authorities under the Act to initiate action against the Government employees who were contested and elected in Arcot Lutheran Church election by violating Rule 23 of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1973.

¶15

2.Heard the arguments advanced on either side.

¶16

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that without going into the merits of the case, it would suffice, if this Court issues direction to the fourth respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 04.03.2019 in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders.

¶17

4.Since this Court is not going to issue any positive order in favour of the petitioner and this Court is only inclined to issue direction to the fourth respondent, no prejudice will be caused to the private respondents and hence, notice to the private respondents is dispensed with.

¶18

5.Considering the limited request made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, I am inclined to issue direction to the fourth respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 04.03.2019, on merits and in accordance with law, after affording opportunity to the fifth respondent and other aggrieved persons and pass appropriate orders, as expeditiously as possible.

¶19

6.The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

¶20

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶21

pri

¶22

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

¶23

¶24

The Principal Secretary to Government
School Educational Department,
Fort St.George,
Chennai – 9.
2. The Under Secretary to Government
Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department
Fort St.George,
Chennai – 9.
3. The District Collector,
Tiruvannamalai,
Tiruvannamalai District.
4. The Chief Educational Officer,
Tiruvannamalai,
Tiruvannamalai District.
+1 CC to The Govt. Pleader sr 93079, 93059
+1 CC to Mr.N.Edwin Jeyakumar, Advocate sr 92241.
W.P.No.22885 of 2019
PA(CO)
SP(11/12/2019)

¶25

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

C.Newton v. The Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.Newton 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ranganathan, Vs Govt. of Pudhucherry

T.Shanmugam Vs the District Registrar

S.Selvaraj Vs the Commissioner

M/S.Alwarpet Benefit Fund Ltd. Vs the Inspector General of

K.Pugazhendhi Vs the Special Deputy Collector

V.Ramachandran, Vs the Principal Secretary