Allowed

A.Nandagopal v. the Secretary to Government

Madras HC4 Mar 2020WA/4336/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appeal dismissing the challenge to the Single Judge's refusal of interim relief. However, the Court observed that expedited disposal of the underlying writ petition regarding service benefits is warranted and directed the Single Judge to dispose of it quickly.

What did the court decide?

Writ Appeal allowed with observation directing Single Judge to dispose of main petition expeditiously; C.M.P. closed.

A.Nandagopal Vs the Secretary to Government — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 04.03.2020

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

The Hon'ble Mr.A.P.SAHI, THE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶5

AND

¶6

The Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

¶7

W.A.No.4336 of 2019

¶8

and C.M.P.No.27897 of 2019

¶9

A.Nandagopal ..Appellant/Petitioner -vs-

¶10

1.The Secretary to Government Municipal Administration Water Supply Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 004.

¶11

2.The Commissioner of Municipal Administration, M.R.C. Nagar, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai 600 028. ..Respondents/Respondents

¶12

Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 26.11.2019 passed in W.M.P.No.33394 of 2019 in W.P.No.32958 of 2019 on the file of this Court.

¶13

Writ Miscelleneous Petition praying that in the Circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to grant an order of interim stay of the operation of the order made in ROC.No.9236/2016/TP 1-3 dated 15/05/2019 passed by the 2^nd respondent, during the (WMP.33394/2019) pendency of the WP.32958/2019.

¶14

Which was filed to quash the order of the 2^nd respondent dated 15/05/19 in ROC.No.9236/2016/JP 1-3 in so far as this Petitioner is concerned.

¶15

For Appellant : Mr.V.Govardhanan for Mr.M.Gnanasekar For Respondents : Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan

¶16

State Govt. Pleader

¶17

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

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

(Delivered by The Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶20

We have heard learned counsel for the appellant.

¶21

2.The appeal is directed against a refusal by the learned Single Judge to grant any interim relief on the ground that grant of any interim relief would amount to granting the final relief. We entirely agree with this proposition of the learned Single Judge. We see no reason or error so as to entertain this appeal.

¶22

3.However, keeping in view the nature of punishment and further the fact that the appellant may have chances of claiming promotion or other service benefits, the earlier disposal of the writ petition might serve the purpose. We, accordingly, request the learned Single Judge having the roster to consider the same expeditiously.

¶23

The Writ Appeal is consigned to records with the said
observation. No costs. Consequently, C.M.P.No.27897 of 2019 is
closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VI)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
sra
To
1.The Secretary to Government
Municipal Administration Water
Supply Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai 600 004.
2.The Commissioner of Municipal
Administration, M.R.C. Nagar,
Raja Annamalaipuram,
Chennai 600 028.
+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.19740

¶24

W.A.No.4336 of 2019 SR(CO) KKV/12/08/2020

¶25

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

A.Nandagopal v. the Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Nandagopal v. the Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s.Adyah Solar Energy Private Ltd. Vs Union of India

M/s.Adyah Solar Energy Private Ltd. Vs Union of India

M/s.Adyah Solar Energy Private Ltd. Vs Union of India

D.Perumalram Vs the Secretary to Government

S.Arputharaj Vs Government of Tamil Nadu

S.Arputharaj Vs Government of Tamil Nadu