Allowed

D.Joseph Manohar v. Managing Director

Madras HC22 Mar 2021WP/6755/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras directed the Metropolitan Transport Corporation to consider the petitioner's representation to nominate his wife and children in his service records. The court issued a direction for inclusion within two weeks upon production of the marriage registration certificate.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondent to include the petitioner's wife and children as nominees in the Service Register within two weeks upon production of the marriage registration certificate.

D.Joseph Manohar Vs Managing Director — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.No.6755 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 22.03.2021

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN

¶6

W.P.No.6755 of 2021

¶7

D. Joseph Manohar

¶8

J. Prasanna Indira

¶9

... Petitioners

¶10

-vs-

¶11

Managing Director, Metropolitan Transport Corporation Chennai Limited Pallavan salai, Chennai 600 002. ... Respondent

¶12

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to consider the first petitioner's representation dated 08.10.2018 in accordance with law.

¶13

For Petitioners : Mr.K.Senthil Kumar For Respondent : Mr.K.Moorthy

¶14

ORDER

¶15

This writ petition has been filed, seeking a direction to the respondent

¶16

to consider the first petitioner's representation dated 08.10.2018 in accordance with law.

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.1 of 4

¶18

W.P.No.6755 of 2021

¶19

It is the case of the petitioners that before his marriage with the 2^nd

¶20

petitioner, the 1^st petitioner has nominated the name of his friend by name, Mercy Chitra as nominee in his Service Records and, after marrying the second petitioner, the 1^st petitioner wanted to include the name of his wife, namely the second petitioner herein and the children born to them out of wedlock. In this regard, the 1^st petitioner has made a representation dated 24.10.2018 to the respondent for suitable mutation. Since there was no response on his representation, the present petition has been filed for the aforesaid direction.

¶21

It is pertinent to mention here that it is open to an employee to nominate anyone as a nominee and further, it is also open to him to change the nominee at any time. In the present case on hand, this Court finds nothing wrong in the act of the 1^st petitioner in nominating his friend, Mercy Chitra initially as nominee and now, he wanted to change the nominee and include his wife's name and children in the place of the said Mercy Chitra in the Official Records, for which a representation was made as early as on 08.10.2018.

¶22

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.2 of 4

¶23

W.P.No.6755 of 2021

¶24

In view of the fact that the 1^st petitioner has already made a representation to the respondent, the request of the first petitioner shall be considered for inclusion of his wife's name / 2^nd petitioner herein and his children in the Records, after due registration of their marriage with the appropriate Sub Registrar's Office and the Registration Certificate shall be produced to the respondent herein. Upon receipt of the Certificate, the name of the second petitioner and his children shall be included as nominees in the Service Register, within a period of two weeks thereafter.

¶25

With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶26

22.03.2021

¶27

dpq Index: Yes/No Speaking order / Non speaking order

¶28

To:

¶29

Managing Director, Metropolitan Transport Corporation Chennai Limited Pallavan salai, Chennai 600 002.

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.3 of 4

¶31

W.P.No.6755 of 2021

¶32

S.VAIDYANATHAN, J. dpq

¶33

W.P.No.6755 of 2021

¶34

22.03.2021

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.4 of 4

D.Joseph Manohar v. Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D.Joseph Manohar v. Managing Director

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

K.Sathiyamoorthy Vs The Joint Registrar

N.Malarvizhi Vs The Deputy Director of Health Services

S.Rajeswari Vs The Secretary

V.Murugaiyan Vs The Chairman

T.R.Vijayalatha Vs Director

M.Lakshmi Narayanan Vs Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission