Writ petitions seeking retirement benefits and protection from suspension at the eve of retirement were dismissed as infructuous following a subsequent order passed by the respondent on 13.03.2014.
Petitioner to retire without prejudice to disciplinary proceedings. Relief granted earlier was made infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 12.11.2019
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
W.P.Nos.35029 & 24736 of 2004 and W.M.P.Nos.42259, to 42261 of 2004 in W.P.No.35029 of 2004 and W.M.P.Nos. 30092 & 30093 of 2004 in
W.P.No.24736 of 2004
S.Mayilerumperumal ... Petitioner in both WPs
v. 1. Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By the Secretary, Highways Department, St. George Fort,
Chennai – 600 009.
PWD, & General Buildings,
Chepauk, Chenai – 600 005. ... Respondents in both WPs
W.P.No.35029/2004 :
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the 1st respondent made in G.O.(3D) No.222 Highways (HL1) Department, dated 29.10.2004 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to retire on his superannuation i.e. on 31.10.2004 with all his retirement benefits without prejudice to any disciplinary proceedings which may be initiated.
W.P.No.24736/2004 :
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus,forbearing the respondents from placing the petitioner under suspension on the eve of his retirement and consequently permit the petitioner to retire on his superannuation i.e. on 31.10.2004 with all his retirement benefits without prejudice to any disciplinary proceedings which may be initiated.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Silambannan, Senior Counsel in both WP's for Mr.N.Umapathi
For Respondents: Mr.S. Suresh Kumar, in both WP's Government Advocate
COMMON ORDER
Mr.S.Silambannan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the 1st respondent had already passed an order on 13.03.2014 and in view of the same, the relief sought for in the Writ Petitions have before infructuous.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CCC)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
Rj
To
1. The Secretary,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Highways Department,
St. George Fort,
Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Chief Engineer (Highways),
PWD, & General Buildings,
Chepauk, Chenai – 600 005.
+1cc to the Special Government Pleader, S.R.No.94108 & 94107
W.P.Nos.35029 & 24736 of 2004 and W.M.P.Nos.42259, to 42261 of 2004 in W.P.No.35029 of 2004 and W.M.P.Nos. 30092 & 30093 of 2004 in W.P.No.24736 of 2004
RP(CO) CS/11/12/2019
S. Mayilerumperumal
Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By the Secretary, Highways Department
Chief Engineer (Highways), PWD & General Buildings
M. Duraiswamy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
