Remanded

V. Jeyarajan v. Samayamoorthy

Madras HC18 Nov 2022CONT P(MD)/787/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a contempt petition for failure to act on a previous writ order regarding terminal benefits. The petitioner, compulsorily retired in 2018, sought settlement of benefits. The court directed the respondents to complete the entire process within eight weeks of receiving the order copy.

What did the court decide?

Directing the respondents and the Law Secretary to complete the entire exercise for settlement of terminal benefits within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

V. Jeyarajan Vs Samayamoorthy — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

Cont.P.(MD)No.787 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 18.11.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

Cont.P.(MD)No.787 of 2022 in W.P.(MD)No.17699 of 2021

V.Jeyarajan

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.Samayamoorthy,

State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Agriculture Department / Agriculture Production Commissioner, Secretariat, Chennai.

¶12

2.A.Annadurai I.A.S.,

¶13

Director of Agriculture, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶14

3.P.Shailas,

¶15

Joint Director of Agriculture, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District. ... Respondents

¶16

1/4

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶18

PRAYER:

¶19

Cont.P.(MD)No.787 of 2022

¶20

PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the respondents for willful deliberate and disobedience of the order passed by this Court W.P.(MD)No.17699 of 2021 dated 29.09.2021.

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Panneer Selvam

¶22

For Respondents : Mr.A.K.Manikkam, Spl. Government Pleader.

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶25

2.The petitioner was employed as Assistant Director in Agriculture Department. He was visited with punishment of compulsory retirement on 12.11.2018. All that the petitioner wants is the settlement of terminal benefits. With that relief, he filed W.P.(MD)No.17699 of 2021. The writ petition was disposed of on 29.09.2021 after recording the submission of

¶26

the learned counsel for the State that final order will be passed on the petitioner's application within a period of twelve weeks. Even though

¶27

2/4

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

Cont.P.(MD)No.787 of 2022

¶30

more than one year has elapsed from the said date, no order has been

¶31

filed. That led to the filling of this contempt petition.

¶32

3.The benefits payable to a retired employee ought to be paid within three months. That is statutory requirement. Here is a case where the petitioner retired wayback in November 2018 and full four years have lapsed.

¶33

4.Mrs.Saraswathi, Joint Director of Agriculture, Ramanathapuram,

¶34

Ramanathapuram District is present in person and she states that necessary proposal has already been sent to the Government and the file is presently pending in the Law Department. It appears that the Finance Department has already cleared the proposal. Thereafter, TNPSC has to offer its opinion and final order has to be passed by the first respondent. Thereafter, disbursement has to take place. Considering the special facts and circumstances of the case, I direct that the entire exercise should be competed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶35

3/4

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶37

Cont.P.(MD)No.787 of 2022

¶38

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

¶39

ias

¶40

5.With this direction, this contempt petition is closed.

¶41

18.11.2022 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No ias Note: Issue order copy on 21.11.2022 To:-

¶42

1.The Secretary, Agriculture Department / Agriculture Production Commissioner, Secretariat, Chennai. 2.The Director of Agriculture, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

¶43

3.The Joint Director of Agriculture, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.

¶44

4.Law Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai.

¶45

Cont.P.(MD)No.787 of 2022 in W.P.(MD)No.17699 of 2021

¶46

4/4

¶47

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

V. Jeyarajan v. Samayamoorthy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V. Jeyarajan v. Samayamoorthy

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

The Management Vs the Authority Under

John Ravikumar..S Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

Manimegalai.R Vs The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission

T. Vimala Bai, Vs R. Alphonse

Suresh Kumar.N Vs The Chairman

Dr.T.Gnanasekaran Vs State of Tamil Nadu