Disposed

P.Latha v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC6 Apr 2022WP/111/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a suspension order. While noting jurisdictional doubts, the court directed the respondents to pay subsistence allowance and monetary benefits for the suspension period now that the suspension has been revoked, and closed the connected miscellaneous petition.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to pay subsistence allowance and monetary benefits during suspension period; petition disposed of without costs.

P.Latha Vs The State of Tamil Nadu — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 06.04.2022

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶5

W.P.NO.111 OF 2022 AND W.M.P.NO.108 OF 2022

P.Latha

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Environment and Forest Department, Secretariat,

¶10

Chennai- 600009.

¶11

2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Head of Forest Force, Panagal Maaligai, No.1 Jeenis Road, Saidapet, Chennai-600015.

¶12

3.The Chief Conservator of Forests, Trichy Circle, Near Court Campus, Cantonment, Trichy-620001.

¶13

4.The District Forest Officer, Ariyalur Forest Division, Ariyalur-621701. ...Respondents

¶14

Prayer : Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of impugned order issued by the 4th respondent dated 17.12.2021 in Proc.No.E/4402/2021 and quash the same, consequently direct the 3rd and 4th respondents to allow the petitioner to work as Superintendent in the District Forest Office/4th respondent office.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.M.R.Jothimanian For Respondents : Mrs.S. Anitha, Spl.GP

¶16

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

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The relief sought for in the writ petition is to call for the records of impugned order issued by the 4th respondent dated 17.12.2021 in Proc.No.E/4402/2021 and quash the same, consequently direct the 3rd and 4th respondents to allow the petitioner to work as Superintendent in the District Forest Office/4th respondent office.

¶19

Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶20

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the 4^th respondent has no jurisdiction to issue suspension order against the petitioner under Rule 10 of Tamil Nadu Ministerial Service Rules. Therefore, the impugned suspension order issued by the 4^th respondent is illegal and liable to be set aside.

¶21

The learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that subsequently, the 4^th respondent by proceedings dated 28.01.2022 has revoked the suspension and permitted the petitioner to join duty. Therefore the petitioner is entitled for the subsistence allowance and other monetary benefits for the suspension pension as per Rules.

¶22

In view of the fact that the petitioner's suspension has been revoked by the 4^th respondent, it would be appropriate to direct the respondents to pay the subsistence allowance and other monetary benefits during the period of suspension.

¶23

Accordingly, the respondents are directed to pay the subsistence allowance and other monetary benefits to the petitioner during the suspension period as per Rules, as expeditiously as possible.

¶24

With the above directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

Assistant Registrar(CS-VI)

¶27

//True Copy//

¶28

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶29

¶30

¶31

1.The Principal Secretary to Government,

¶32

Environment and Forest Department, Secretariat, Chennai- 600009.

¶33

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

¶34

2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Head of Forest Force, Panagal Maaligai, No.1, Jeenis Road, Saidapet, Chennai-600015.

¶35

3.The Chief Conservator of Forests, Trichy Circle, Near Court Campus, Cantonment, Trichy-620001.

¶36

4.The District Forest Officer, Ariyalur Forest Division, Ariyalur-621701.

¶37

+1cc to the Special Government Pleader Sr.No.23861

¶38

+1cc to the Special Government Pleader (Forest) Sr.No.24252

¶39

W.P.No. 111 of 2022 and

¶40

W.M.P.No. 108 of 2022

¶41

SKM(CO) RVM(12/05/2022)

¶42

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

P.Latha v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Latha v. The State of Tamil Nadu

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

I.Alangara Ruby Vs The Director of School Education

Saritha Vs The District Collector

N.Srinivasan Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

Tmt.Savithri, Vs The Chairman

M.Boopathy Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

S.Chandrasekar (Ppo.No. R0322651) Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu