Disposed

Subramanian v. the Addl.Registrar General

Madras HC22 Jun 2021WP(MD)/10408/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the rejection of a service appeal by the Principal District Judge. It held the rejection was improper and directed the petitioner to re-submit the appeal through the proper channel for forwarding to the High Court.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to re-present appeal to Principal District Judge; no order on costs.

Subramanian Vs the Addl.Registrar General — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.[MD]No.10408 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 22.06.2021 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI

¶4

W.P.[MD]No.10408 of 2021 and W.M.P.[MD]No.8092 of 2021

¶5

Subramanian ... Petitioner

¶6

Vs.

¶7

1.The Registrar General,

¶8

Madras High Court, Chennai.

¶9

2.The Principal District Judge, Principal District Court, Thanjavur.

¶10

3.The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thanjavur.

¶11

4.The Judicial Magistrate,

¶12

Fast Track Court, Thanjavur.

¶13

... Respondents

¶14

P RAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the impugned order passed by the Principal District Judge/2 nd respondent in A.No.5/2021, dated 01.04.2021 and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Edin Brough For Respondents : Mr.N.Mohideen Basha

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

[Order of the Court was made by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J. ]

¶18

With the consent on either side, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

¶19

2.Heard Mr.P.Edin Brough, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.N.Mohideen Basha, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents.

¶20

3.The petitioner who was dismissed from service for https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ misappropriation which was committed when he was working as Head

¶21

1/3

¶22

W.P.[MD]No.10408 of 2021

¶23

Clerk in the Judicial Magistrate's Court (FTC), Thanjavur, has filed this writ petition, challenging the order passed by the Principal District Judge, Thanjavur dated 01.04.2021. As against the impugned order, the petitioner has filed an appeal to the High Court, however the appeal petition was presented in the office of the Principal District Judge, Thanjavur, which was returned by memo dated 21.06.2021, advising the petitioner to submit the appeal petition through proper channel.

¶24

4.Further, we find that on the date when the petitioner was dismissed from service, he was working as a Copyist Superintendent in the Court of the Principal District Judge, Thanjavur. Further more, in terms of Rule 26 of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Disciplinary and Appeal) Rules, the head of office is entitled to receive the appeal petition and forward the same to the appellate authority. Therefore, we are of the view that the appeal petition filed by the petitioner can be received by the office of the Principal District Judge, Thanjavur and forward to the High Court.

¶25

5.It is submitted that the reason due to which the Principal District Judge, Thanjavur has returned the appal petition is because the petitioner has sent an advance copy, which is not the proper procedure. Therefore, the appeal petition in original should be presented before the Court of Principal District Judge, Thanjavur and then only it will be forwarded.

¶26

6.In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of, by directing the petitioner to re-present the returned appeal petition to the office of the Principal District Judge, Thanjavur, which shall receive if it is in order and forward it to High Court for consideration by the appellate authority. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶27

Sd/Assistant Registrar (CSII)

¶28

// True Copy //

¶29

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶30

¶31

Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶32

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

¶33

2/3

¶34

W.P.[MD]No.10408 of 2021

¶35

¶36

1.The Registrar General, Madras High Court, Chennai.

¶37

2.The Principal District Judge, Principal District Court, Thanjavur.

¶38

3.The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thanjavur.

¶39

4.The Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court, Thanjavur.

¶40

W.P.[MD]No.10408 of 2021

¶41

22.06.2021

¶42

KB(30.06.2021) 3P 5C

¶43

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

¶44

3/3

Subramanian v. the Addl.Registrar General

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subramanian v. the Addl.Registrar General

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

Manikandan.M Vs the District Collector

The Management Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation(Madurai Division II Limited), Vs v.Manickam

T.Lakshmanan Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Kremmer Sandegren Foundation Pattukottai Vs The Inspector General of Registration

M/S. Asl Represented by Its Vs the Branch Manager

Dhanalakshmi Vs the District Collector