Disposed

K.Easwari v. The Managing Director

Madras HC24 Feb 2020WP/1440/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought reinstatement in service, arguing termination was due to a pending criminal case without a filed charge sheet. Withdrawing from merits, the Court directed the Respondent to consider a pending representation and decide on merits within 12 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to furnish copy of representation; Respondent to consider representation and pass order on merits within 12 weeks.

K.Easwari Vs The Managing Director — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 24.02.2020

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶5

W.P.No.1440 of 2015

¶6

K. Easwari ..Petitioner

¶7

Vs The Managing Director, Pondicherry Agro Products, Food and Civil Supplies Corporation, Thattanchavadi, Puducherry-605 009. ...Respondent Prayer:- Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to reinstate the petitioner back in service with all consequential benefits. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Gnanasekar For Respondent : Mr.T.M. Naveen ORDER This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondent to reinstate the petitioner back in service with all consequential benefits.

¶8

According to the writ petitioner, while she was working as Daily rated employee in the respondent/Corporation since 2004, continued to be as DLR till her termination from April, 2013 which is based on a criminal case registered against her. It is the case of the petitioner that a case was registered in Crime No.5 of 1993 under Section 420 of IPC by the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Unit of the Police Department of Pondicherry. Subsequently, she was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 07.04.1993. Thereafter, she was deemed to be under suspension under Rule 10(2) (a) of the CCA Rules. But, she was not involved in the aforesaid criminal case and no charge sheet was filed against her till now. Hence, she made several representations to the respondent/Corporation requesting for re-instatement in service, but there is no reply from the respondent/Corporation in this regard sofar. Hence, the writ petitioner has come forward with the present https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ writ petition.

¶9

No counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent/Corporation in this case.

¶10

Without going into the merits of the matter, this Court directs the respondent/Corporation to consider the petitioner's representation 21.05.2014 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible within a period of twelve weeks (12) from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is needless to say that the petitioner shall also furnish a copy of the representation along with the order copy to the respondent/Corporation.

¶11

With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶12

Sd/Assistant Registrar (CS-VI) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar msm To The Managing Director, Pondicherry Agro Products, Food and Civil Supplies Corporation, Thattanchavadi, Puducherry-605 009.

¶13

+1cc to Mr.M.Gnanasekar, Advocate, SR. No. 15579 +1cc to Mr.K.P.Jotheeswaran, Advocate, SR. No. 16048

¶14

W.P.No.1440 of 2015 VGI(CO) RMP(17/07/2020)

¶15

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

K.Easwari v. The Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Easwari 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

S.Murali, Vs The Director of Town

Mrs.K.Kanagavalli Vs The Chief Educational Officer

A.Stanely, Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

R.Viswanathan Vs Vikram Kapoor IAS

V.Murugesan, Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

R.Periasamy, Vs The Joint Director of School