Disposed

M.Chinnathambi, v. State Rep. by

Madras HC20 Dec 2022WP/20804/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the First Respondent to pass final orders on a pending proposal concerning the petitioner's monetary benefits within twelve weeks. The Writ Petition challenging the prior order was disposed of accordingly, with no costs awarded.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the first respondent to pass final orders on the petitioner's proposal for monetary benefits within twelve weeks.

M.Chinnathambi, Vs State Rep. by — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.No.20804 of 2016

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 20.12.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH

¶6

W.P.No.20804 of 2016

¶7

M. Chinnathambi ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.State rep. by The Secretary, Higher Education (2) Department, Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶10

2.The Commissioner of Technical Education, Directorated of Technical Education (Engineering), Guindy, Chennai – 600 025.

¶11

3.The Principal, Government Engineering College, Salem – 11. ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the order passed by the first respondent in G.O.Ms.No.323, dated 28.12.2018 and quash the same consequently, directing the respondents to issue the order of confirmation of petitioner's service in the cadre of Watchman with effect from 12.02.1986 and further direct the

¶13

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

¶14

1/4

¶15

W.P.No.20804 of 2016

¶16

respondents to pay all the monetary and other attendant benefits in pursuant to said confirmation.

¶17

[Prayer amended vide order dated 17.03.2021 made in WMP.No.5883/2019 in WP.No.20804/2016 by RMDJ]

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.M. Elango For Respondent : Mr.K.H. Ravi Kumar, Government Advocate

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the

¶21

first respondent in G.O.Ms.No.323, dated 28.12.2018 and to quash the same and consequently, to direct the respondents to issue the order of confirmation of petitioner's service in the cadre of Watchman with effect from 12.02.1986 and further direct the respondents to pay all the monetary

¶22

and other attendant benefits in pursuant to said confirmation.

¶23

2. Today when the matter was called, the learned Government

¶24

Advocate on written instructions, submitted that since the petitioner's seniors were regularized with monetary benefit from 30.03.2006, a proposal for granting monetary benefits to the petitioner with effect from 30.03.2006, has been sent to the Government through their letter No.110423/D5/1997 dated 30.09.2020, which is pending before the

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/4

¶26

W.P.No.20804 of 2016

¶27

Government.

¶28

3. Since the petitioner's request has now been acted upon by the Government and is under consideration, it would be appropriate to direct the Government to consider the proposal of the Commissioner of Technical Education.

¶29

4. Accordingly, there shall be a direction to the first respondent herein, to pass final orders on the proposal sent by the Commissioner of Technical Education, through their Letter No.110423/D5/1997 dated 30.09.2020, within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶30

5. With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands ordered. No

¶31

costs.

¶32

20.12.2022

¶33

Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No

¶34

Sni

¶35

3/4

¶36

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

W.P.No.20804 of 2016

M.S.RAMESH,J.

Sni

1.The Secretary Higher Education (2) Department, Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶42

2.The Commissioner of Technical Education, Directorated of Technical Education (Engineering), Guindy, Chennai – 600 025.

¶43

3.The Principal, Government Engineering College, Salem – 11.

¶44

W.P.No.20804 of 2016

¶45

20.12.2022

¶46

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

¶47

4/4

M.Chinnathambi, v. State Rep. by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Chinnathambi, v. State Rep. by

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

C.Ramu, S/o.Chinnathambi Vs The Secretary to Government

R.Jaganathan, Vs The Deputy Registrar of

C.Poongodi, Vs The Deputy Registrar of

M.Muniammal Vs The Principal Secretary to

M.Sowmya Vs The District Collector

S.Udayakumar Vs The Principal Secretary to