Allowed

A.Rosemary v. The Principal Secretary to

Madras HC22 Apr 2019WP/8810/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras allowed a writ petition challenging the recovery of Special Grade benefits. The Court held that administrative orders affecting service rights cannot be issued without affording a prior opportunity of hearing. It quashed the impugned letter and directed the respondents to issue a show cause notice within four weeks, followed by objections and a merits decision within twelv

What did the court decide?

The impugned order was quashed. The petitioners were directed to be issued show cause notices within four weeks, submit objections within two weeks, and the authorities must decide on merits within tw

A.Rosemary Vs The Principal Secretary to — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 22-04-2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

¶5

W.P.No.8810 of 2018

¶6

and

¶7

W.M.P.No.10680 of 2018

¶8

1.A.Rosemary 2.P.Jothimani 3.R.Valliyathal 4.K.Santhamani 5.R.Manimekalai 6.V.Mariammal 7.R.Dhanalakshmi 8.R.Vasanthi 9.T.Sumathi 10.V.Valarmathi 11.N.Parimalagandhi 12.P.Chitrakalavathi 13.K.Nagarathinam 14.A.Rameshwari 15.K.Thilagamani 16.P.Valarmathi 17.P.Radhamani 18.K.Angayarkanni 19.M.Pushpa 20.T.Manchuladevi 21.K.G.Kala 22.S.Lakshmi 23.B.Kanagavalli 24.P.Palanthal 25.E.Saraswathi 26.V.Ganambal 27.S.Karpagarani 28.P.Pushpam 29.N.Sarojini 30.M.Eswaran .. Petitioners ..Vs.. 1.The Principal Secretary to Government, Handloom, Handicrafts, Textiles and Khadi Department, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶9

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

¶10

2.The Secretary to Government, Commercial Taxes and Registration Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶11

3.The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai.

¶12

4.The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Coimbatore Commercial Taxes Division, Coimbatore. .. Respondents

¶13

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned letter of the first respondent in Letter No.2928/ F1/2016-8 dated 19.12.2017 and quash the same as illegal and unlawful.

¶14

For Petitioners : Mr.J.Pooventhera Rajan

¶15

For Respondents : Mr.V.Hari Babu, Additional Government Pleader (Taxes). O R D E R

¶16

The grievances of the writ petitioners are that the Special Grade benefits granted to the writ petitioners are sought to be recovered by way of letter dated 19.12.2017, without even issuing a show cause notice and opportunity to the writ petitioners.

¶17

Though the learned counsel for the writ petitioners made a submission in respect of the merits of the case, this Court is of an opinion that the same ought to be adjudicated by the Competent Authorities only after receiving the explanation / objections from the aggrieved employees. It is an established principle that an order effecting the service rights and conditions of the employees cannot be issued without providing an opportunity to all such employees.

¶18

In the present case on hand, the respondents are unable to establish that such an opportunity was provided or show cause notice was issued to these writ petitioners and therefore, it is a fit case for remand. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the first respondent in Letter No.2928/F1/2016-8 dated 19.12.2017 is quashed.

¶19

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

¶20

The respondents are directed to issue show cause notice to all the writ petitioners within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the show cause notice, the writ petitioners are directed to submit their objections / explanations along with the relevant orders or documents within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the show cause notice thereafter. The Competent Authorities shall consider the records and materials available and accordingly pass order on merits and in accordance with law within a period of twelve weeks thereafter.

¶21

Accordingly, the writ petition stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶22

-sdAssistant Registrar /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar Svn To 1.The Principal Secretary to Government, Handloom, Handicrafts, Textiles and Khadi Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009. 2.The Secretary to Government, Commercial Taxes and Registration Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009. 3.The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai. 4.The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Coimbatore Commercial Taxes Division, Coimbatore. +1 CC to M/S.J.POOVENTHERARAJAN Advocate SR.NO.39273 +1 CC to M/S.The Special Govt.Pleader (Taxes).NO.39014 W.P.No.8810 of 2018 GJIT(CO) cm 25/06/2019

¶23

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

A.Rosemary v. The Principal Secretary to

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Rosemary v. The Principal Secretary to

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

Krishnamurthy Sivakumar Vs M.Shanthi

S.Selvarasu Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

K.Krishnan, Vs Government of Tamil Nadu

P.K.Prabhavathy Vs Union of India

G.Jayaraman, S/o.Gopal Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

K.Murugan, Vs The Government of Tamilnadu