Disposed

S.Saravanan, v. Union of India

Madras HC6 Sept 2019WP/26638/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition filed seeking mandamus to direct the Central Administrative Tribunal to decide pending original and miscellaneous applications involving the petitioner facing service action and corruption charges. The Court requested the Tribunal to expeditiously dispose of the interim application.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Central Administrative Tribunal to dispose of the miscellaneous petition within eight weeks; connected petitions closed.

S.Saravanan, Vs Union of India — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 06.09.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN AND

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE

¶6

WP.No.26638/2019 & WMP.Nos.26027 & 26028/2019

¶7

S.Saravanan .. Petitioner
Versus
1.The Union of India
rep.by the Secretary to Government
Government of Puducherry, Chief Secretariat
Puducherry.
2.The Director General of Police
Government of Puducherry
Puducherry.
3.Thiru Rajasankar Vellat
Enquiry Officer, Superintendent of Police
Traffic [HQ], Puducherry.
4.The Registrar
Central Administrative Tribunal
Madras Bench, High Court Buildings
Chennai 600 104. .. Respondents

¶8

Prayer:Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of mandamus directing the 4^th respondent to decide the original application in OA.No.148/2019, OA.No.474/2019, OA.No.579/2019 and MA.No.369/2019 in OA.No.474/2019 filed by the petitioner at early date that may be prescribed by this Court.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Gnanasekar

¶10

For RR 1 & 2 : Mr.R.Syed Mustafa, Spl.GP [Puducherry]

¶11

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

¶12

ORDER

¶13

[Order of the Court was made by M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.,]

¶14

(1)By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. Mr.R.Syed Mustafa, learned Special Government Pleader [Puducherry] accepts notice on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2.

¶15

(2)The petitioner herein faced prosecution in Spl.CC.No.15/2010 on the file of the Court of Special Judge, under the Prevention of Corruption Act, Puducherry, for the commission of the alleged offences u/s.120-B IPC and u/s.7 and 13[2] of the Prevention of Corruption Act, and he was convicted by the Trial Court and challenging the same, the petitioner had preferred Crl.A.No.392/2014 and similarly, one G.Venkatachalapathy, who was also convicted, filed Crl.A.No.389/2014 on the file of this Court and a learned Single Judge of this Court, vide common judgment dated 12.04.2018, had allowed both the appeals and acquitted both the accused.

¶16

(3)Thereafter, the petitioner was issued with the impugned charge memo dated 05.04.2019 by the 2^nd respondent and making a challenge to the same, he filed OA.No.579/2019. The petitioner also filed OA.No.474/2019 challenging the suspension order dated 11.03.2019 passed by the 2^nd respondent and pending disposal of the same, he filed a miscellaneous petition in MA.No.369/2019 praying for an order of interim injunction, restraining the respondents from conducting the enquiry proceedings in pursuant to the order dated 17.06.2019 passed by the Director General of Puducherry, pending OA.No.474/2019 and since the said miscellaneous petition has not been taken up and given disposal at an early date, came forward to file the present writ petition.

¶17

(4)Heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R.Syed Mustafa, learned Special Government Pleader [Puducherry] appearing for the official respondents and also perused the materials placed before it.

¶18

(5)This Court, taking into consideration, the limited scope of prayer sought for by the petitioner and also making it clear that it did not go into the merits or otherwise of the main Original Application, request the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, to accord priority and dispose of MA.No.369/2019 in OA.No.474/2019 as expeditiously as possible and not later than, eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶19

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

¶20

(6)The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶21

s/d-
Assistant Registrar(CS-III)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
AP
To
1.The Secretary to Government
Union of India
Government of Puducherry,
Chief Secretariat
Puducherry.
2.The Director General of Police
Government of Puducherry
Puducherry.
3.The Registrar
Central Administrative Tribunal
Madras Bench, High Court Buildings
Chennai 600 104.
+1 CC to The Govt. Pleader cum Public Prosecutor(Pondy) sr 77557
+1 CC to Mr.M.Gnanasekar, Advocate sr 78054.
WP.No.26638/2019
KJI(CO)
SP(20/09/2019)

¶22

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

S.Saravanan, v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Saravanan, v. Union of India

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

R.Jayasankaran Vs Union of India

A.Jaishankar Vs the District Collector

S.Ravi S/O. Subramani Vs The Principal Secretary

K. Nagalakshmi Vs The Managing Director

The Residents Welfare Association Vs The Secretary To Govt

V.Munikrishnan Vs The State of Tamil Nadu