Disposed

A.Kanagarajan v. the Managing Director

Madras HC26 Feb 2019WP(MD)/2998/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition sought a writ to direct respondents to pay retirement benefits. The Court did not examine merits but ordered the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 31.01.2019 on merits within eight weeks, after affording an opportunity of hearing.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to consider petitioner's representation dated 31.01.2019 on merits and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks after affording opportunity of hearing.

A.Kanagarajan Vs the Managing Director — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :26.02.2019

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN WP(MD)No.2998 of 2019

A.Kanagarajan

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Managing Director,

¶9

Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, (Kumbakonam) Limited,

¶10

Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District.

¶11

The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, (Kumbakonam) Limited, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District.

¶12

The Administrative Officer, The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Pension Fund Trust, Thiruvalluvar House, Pallavan Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

¶13

... Respondents

¶14

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to pay the retirement benefits with interest to the petitioner in view of the representation, dated 31.01.2019.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Senthil For R1 and R2 : Mr.D.Sivaraman For R3 : Mr.A.P.Muthupandian

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This writ petition has been filed seeking to direct the respondents to pay the retirement benefits with interest to the petitioner.

¶18

2.Claiming the retirement benefits and earned leave salary, the petitioner sent a representation dated 31.01.2019, which is not acted upon by the respondents so far and therefore, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶19

3.Considering the limited scope of the relief sought for by the petitioner in this writ petition, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, directs the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 31.01.2019, on merits and in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders, after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Such an exercise shall be https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶20

¶21

4.The writ petition is disposed of, on above terms. No costs.

¶22

sd/

¶23

Assistant Registrar(writs)

¶24

/True Copy/

¶25

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶26

¶27

The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, (Kumbakonam) Limited, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District.

¶28

The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, (Kumbakonam) Limited, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District.

¶29

The Administrative Officer, The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Pension Fund Trust, Thiruvalluvar House, Pallavan Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

¶30

+1 CC to Mr.D.SIVARAMAN, Advocate ( SR-50080[F] dated 27/02/2019 ) +1 CC to Mr.D.SENTHIL, Advocate ( SR-50315[F] dated 27/02/2019 )

¶31

ORDER MADE IN WP(MD)No.2998 of 2019 26.02.2019

¶32

dsk MK (18.03.2019) 2P 6C

¶33

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

A.Kanagarajan v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Kanagarajan v. the Managing Director

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.Priyanka, Vs the Principal Secretary to

R.Seethalakshmi, Vs the Government of Tamil Nadu

N.Subbarao Vs the Government of Tamil Nadu

R.Aundichamy, Vs the Management of T.N.S.T.C.

S.Killivalavan, Vs the Management of

Baskara Pandi, S/O.v.Pandy, Vs the Dean, Madurai Rajaji Govt.