Disposed

S.Sakithivel v. The Managing Director

Madras HC13 Apr 2022WP/4127/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition was filed seeking a direction to review a suspension order and reinstate the petitioner. The court directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and review the suspension under Government Order No.30, 2012, in light of P.Kannan, within 12 weeks, and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Direction to consider representation dated 10.12.2018 and review suspension order under G.O. No.30, 2012, within twelve weeks; disposal of W.P.

S.Sakithivel Vs The Managing Director — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 13.04.2022

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶5

W.P.No.4127 of 2020

¶6

S.Sakithivel ... Petitioner

¶7

The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Adi Dravidar Housing and Development Corporation Ltd (TAHDCO) No.31, Cenotaph Road, 2^nd Lane, Teynampet, Chennai – 600 018. ... Respondent

¶8

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to review the suspension order in R.O.C.No.A1/6415/2018 dated 22.10.2018 as per the G.O.Ms.No.30 P & AR Department dated 23.02.2012 and thereon within a time to be stipulated by this Court.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vijayakumar

¶10

For Respondent : Mr.Haja Nazirudeen Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mrs.S.Anitha Special Government Pleader

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

This writ petition has been filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to review the suspension order in R.O.C.No.A1/6415/2018 dated 22.10.2018 as per the G.O.Ms.No.30 P & AR Department dated 23.02.2012 and thereon within a time to be stipulated by this Court.

¶13

According to the petitioner, the petitioner was placed under suspension by the respondent on 22.10.2018 for demanding a sum of Rs.2,700/- and the Inspector, Vigilance and AntiCorruption has registered a criminal case in Crime No.12/AC/2018 against the petitioner for the alleged offence under Section 7-A of the Prevention of Corruption Act (Amendment) 2018. The charge sheet has been filed before the concerned jurisdictional Criminal Court. The petitioner has made a representation dated

¶14

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

¶15

10.12.2018 to the respondent for revocation of the suspension order and to reinstate him into service.

¶16

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that as per the Government Order in G.O.(Ms).No.30, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (N) Department, dated 23.02.2012, the Head of Department has to consider the review of the petitioner's suspension periodically as per rules. But so far, the petitioner's suspension order has not been reviewed by the respondent/department. Hence, he prays that an appropriate direction may be issued to the respondent to review the suspension order of the petitioner.

¶17

The learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner's representation dated 10.12.2018 would be considered by the Review Committee and Head of Department level as per the Government Order in G.O. (Ms).No.30, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (N) Department, dated 23.02.2012.

¶18

In the light of the above submissions made by the parties, this Court is inclined to direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 10.12.2018 and to review the suspension order of the petitioner as per the Government Order in G.O.(Ms).No.30, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (N) Department, dated 23.02.2012 and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, by taking note of the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court in the case of P.Kannan vs. The Commissioner for Municipal Administration, Chennai (W.P.Nos.2165 of 2015 and 21628 of 2018 dated 15.03.2022), as expeditiously as possible, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶19

With the above direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

Assistant Registrar(CS-VI)

¶22

//True Copy//

¶23

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶24

¶25

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

¶26

¶27

The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Adi Dravidar Housing and Development Corporation Ltd (TAHDCO), No.31, Cenotaph Road, 2^nd Lane, Teynampet, Chennai – 600 018. +1cc to Mr.S.Vijayakumar, Advocate SR.No.25608 +1cc to the Government Pleader SR.No.25950

¶28

W.P.No.4127 of 2020

¶29

MT(CO) GN(04/05/2022)

¶30

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

S.Sakithivel v. The Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Sakithivel v. The Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B.Arun Vs The Director of Industrial

N.Elankavi Vs S.Rajamani

Ranipet Roca Labour Union Vs The Management of

R.Bhoomadevi Vs The Joint Commissioner of Police

E.Ganesan Vs M/s. Metropolitan Transport

M.Meganathan Vs State of Tamil Nadu