Disposed

R.Juliet v. the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests

Madras HC11 Apr 2022WP/4104/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition filed by a retiring forest Superintendent seeking a posting in Coimbatore division instead of transfer to Mudumalai Tiger Reserve. Court directed the second respondent to consider the representation and decide on merit within four weeks before disposing the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Directed the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders on merit within four weeks.

R.Juliet Vs the Principal Chief Conservator… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 11.4.2022

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶5

W.P.No.4104 of 2022 and W.M.P.No.4236 and 4237 of 2022

¶6

1 R.Juliet ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

1 The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Head of Department), Chennai 15

¶9

2 The Conservator of Forests and Field Director, Anaimalai Tiger Sanctuary, Coimbatore 641 043. ... Respondents

¶10

Prayer : Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records on the file of the first respondent herein issued vide reference No.TC2 / 42655/2021 dated 10.02.2022 and the proceedings of the second Respondent in Na.Ka.No.9102/2021/01 dated 17.02.2022 and to quash the same and to issue consequential directions to the Respondents to retain the petitioner in the existing vacant place to the vacant place of Superintendent in coimbatore Division itself.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Ravi

¶12

For Respondents : Mr.M.Bindran, A.G.P.

¶13

According to the petitioner, the petitioner was working as a Superintendent in the Forest department and when the petitioner is on the verge of retirement, she was transferred to Mudumalai Tiger Reserve, Ootacamand, Nilgiris District. The petitioner made a request to consider and accommodate anyone of the vacancy in Coimbatore division taking into account the difficulties faced by the petitioner, on account of the transfer order being given effect to by the respondent. According to the

¶14

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

¶15

petitioner, the petitioner also joined in the transferred station.

¶16

In view of the above, this Court is inclined to direct the second respondent to consider the representation, dated 14.2.2022 and pass appropriate orders on merit and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order.

¶17

With the above directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

SD/-

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

// TRUE COPY //

SUB ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶22

vaan

¶23

¶24

1 The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, (Head of Department), Chennai 15.

¶25

2 The Conservator of Forests and Field Director, Anaimalai Tiger Sanctuary, Coimbatore 641 043.

¶26

W.P.No.4104 of 2022 and W.M.P.No.4236 and 4237 of 2022

¶27

mt[co] srg 26/04/2022

¶28

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

R.Juliet v. the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Juliet v. the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests

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

S.Ramakrishnan Vs M.Aarthi IAS

N.Kaviam Vs The Accountant General of Tamilnadu

Ganesh M Vs B.Sivakumar

T.Abimannan Vs The Director of Backward classes and minorities welfare officer

C.Gandhimathi Vs Director of School Education

G.Selvaraj Vs State of Tamil Nadu