, High Court Madras dismissed a writ petition seeking reinstatement of a deceased employee, holding that the petition abated due to death without substitution by legal representatives.
Petitioner was reinstated in service along with back wages.
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 : 19.11.2019
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
W.P. No.35558 of 2005
G.Purushothaman ... Petitioner
Vs. 1.The Deputy General Manager cum Appellate Authority, State Bank of India, Disciplinary Proceedings Section, Zonal Office, 86, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001.
2.The Assistant General Manager, Region-I cum Disciplinary Authority, State Bank of India, Disciplinary Proceedings Section, Zonal Office, 86, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001.
3.Dr.A.A.Rajasekar, Chief Manager and Enquiry Officer, State Bank of India, Perambur Branch, Chennai – 600 011. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the order passed by the 2nd respondent in DIS/CON/No.228 dated 19.08.2005 as confirmed in appeal by the 1st respondent by order in DIS/CON/No.285 dated 28.09.2005 and quash the same and to consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 to reinstate the petitioner in service as Special Assistant together with backwages and all attendant benefits.
1/3
For Petitioner : Ms.P.Priyanka for Dr.R.Gowri
For R1 and R2 : Mr.S.Ravindran Senior Counsel for Mr.S.Bazeer Ahmed
R3 : Died
O R D E R
The petitioner has filed the above writ petition to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 19.08.2005 as confirmed in appeal by the 1st respondent by order dated 28.09.2005 and quash the same and consequently, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to reinstate the petitioner in service as Special Assistant, together with back wages and all attendant benefits.
2.The respondents 1 and 2 have filed their counter affidavit dated 08.03.2016, wherein, they have stated that the petitioner had expired on 24.02.2009 and therefore, the writ petition has become infructuous.
3.Though the petitioner died as early as on 24.02.2009, till today, the legal representatives of the deceased petitioner have not taken any steps to get themselves substituted in the place of the petitioner. Under these circumstances, this writ petition is dismissed as abated. No costs.
-s/d-
Assistant Registrar
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
mkn
2/3
To
1.The Deputy General Manager cum Appellate Authority, State Bank of India, Disciplinary Proceedings Section, Zonal Office, 86, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001.
2.The Assistant General Manager, Region-I cum Disciplinary Authority, State Bank of India, Disciplinary Proceedings Section, Zonal Office, 86, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001.
+1 cc to Mr.S.Bazeer Ahmed Advocate sr96118
W.P. No.35558 of 2005
aa27/12/2019
3/3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition challenging termination of service survives after the death of the petitioner without substitution.
Whether the legal representatives must substitute themselves in the place of the deceased petitioner.
G.Purushothaman
The Deputy General Manager cum Appellate Authority, State Bank of India
The Assistant General Manager, Region-I cum Disciplinary Authority, State Bank of India
M. Duraiswamy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
