Disposed

M.Radhakrishnan v. The Principal chief enginner

Madras HC1 Feb 2019WP/3069/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judgeship directed the second respondent, Executive Engineer, to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.12.2018 regarding medical leave salary, bonus, and increment, passing appropriate orders on merits after a personal hearing within eight weeks. The writ petition was disposed of in the above terms.

What did the court decide?

Directed the second respondent to consider the representation dated 24.12.2018 and pass appropriate orders on merits after personal hearing within eight weeks.

M.Radhakrishnan Vs The Principal chief enginner — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 01.02.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN

¶5

W.P.No.3069 of 2019

¶6

M.Radhakrishnan ...Petitioner

¶7

Vs 1.The Principal Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, W.R.O., Chennai -5. 2.The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, W.R.O., Thirumurthi Division, Udumalai pet, Thirupur District.

¶8

3.The Assistant Executive Engineer, Building Construction & Maintenance Sub-Division, Public Works Department, Tuticorin. ...Respondents

¶9

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2^nd respondent to issue direction to the 3^rd respondent to consider the 988 days as Medical Leave and issue salary on the petitioner's representation to the 3^rd respondent on 24.12.2018 which was acknowledged on 02.01.2019, after deducting 110 days as earn leave out of 1098 days from the period of 02.03.2013 to 30.07.2013 for 151 days and from 20.08.2013 to 23.03.2016 for 947 days and bonus from the year 2011 to 2016 immediately.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Balasubramanian

¶11

For Respondents : Mr.R.S.Selvam, Government Advocate O R D E R

¶12

The prayer made in this writ petition is to direct the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 24.12.2018.

¶13

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

¶14

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 24.12.2018 to the second respondent requesting to sanction Medical Leave salary, bonus and increment for the respective periods and the said representation is pending without any progress. Hence, this writ petition.

¶15

Mr. R.S. Selvam, learned Government Advocate taking notice for the respondents submitted that the representation of the petitioner would be considered on merits and in accordance with law, within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶16

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court directs the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 24.12.2018 and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs.

¶17

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VI)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
vsi2
To
1.The Principal Chief Engineer,
Public Works Department, W.R.O.,
Chennai -5.
2.The Executive Engineer,
Public Works Department, W.R.O.,
Thirumurthi Division,
Udumalai pet, Thirupur District.
3.The Assistant Executive Engineer,
Building Construction & Maintenance
Sub-Division, Public Works Department, Tuticorin.
+1 cc to Mr.R.Balasubramanian, Advocate Sr.No.8816
+1 cc to The Government Pleader, Sr.No.9159

¶18

W.P.No.3069 of 2019 VBA(CO) CSL/11.03.2019

¶19

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

M.Radhakrishnan v. The Principal chief enginner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Radhakrishnan v. The Principal chief enginner

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

A.Ramki Vs The Registrar

D.Alagaraju Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

K.Mohan Vs The Special Tahsildar (L.a)

V.Jevitha Vs The Secretary to Govt

S.S.Sivakumar Vs State of Tamil Nadu

G.Lazer Vs The State of Tamil Nadu