Disposed

V.Jeevarekha v. The Principal Secretary to the

Madras HC7 Dec 2023WP/35208/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking a direction to the Government to consider the petitioner's representation dated 18.10.2013 for her promotion as Assistant Director of Local Fund Audit, the High Court directed the first respondent to consider the representation on its merits and dispose of it within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 18.10.2013 and dispose of it on merits within four weeks.

V.Jeevarekha Vs The Principal Secretary to the — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Writ Petition No.35208 of 2015

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 07.12.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE D.NAGARJUN

¶6

Writ Petition No.35208 of 2015

¶7

V.Jeevarekha ..Petitioner

¶8

vs.

¶9

1.The Principal Secretary to the Government, Finance(Local Fund) Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009

¶10

2.The Director of Local Fund Audit, Chennai Corporation, Rippon Buildings,

¶11

Chennai-600 003 ... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 18.10.2013 requesting for inclusion of her name in the promotion panel of Assistant Director of Local Fund Audit for 2012-2013 and for promoting her as Assistant Director of Local Fund Audit as per her seniority.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Rajendran For Respondents : Ms.C.Sangamithirai, Spl.G.P. for R1 Mr.S.Gopinathan for R2

¶14

*****

¶15

1/4

¶16

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

¶17

Writ Petition No.35208 of 2015

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

This writ petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a

¶20

Mandamus, to direct the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 18.10.2013 requesting for inclusion of her name in the promotion panel of Assistant Director of Local Fund Audit for 2012-2013 and to promote her as Assistant Director of Local Fund Audit as per her seniority.

¶21

2.The learned counsel for the second respondent has submitted that a detailed counter affidavit has already been filed, stating that on account of currency of punishment during the panel year, the petitioner was not considered for promotion. He further submitted that the representation of the petitioner dated 18.10.2013 will be considered and answered.

¶22

3. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the records.

¶23

4. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on either

¶24

side and on perusal of the entire records available on record, there shall be a

¶25

2/4

¶26

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

¶27

Writ Petition No.35208 of 2015

¶28

direction to the first respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 18.10.2013 and to dispose of the same on its own merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably not later than four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶29

5.Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶30

07.12.2023

¶31

Index : Yes/No Speaking order:Yes/No dn

¶32

To 1.The Principal Secretary to the Government, Finance(Local Fund) Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009

¶33

2.The Director of Local Fund Audit, Chennai Corporation, Rippon Buildings, Chennai-600 003

¶34

3/4

¶35

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

¶36

Writ Petition No.35208 of 2015

¶37

Dr.D. NAGARJUN, J

¶38

¶39

Writ Petition No.35208 of 2015

¶40

07.12.2023

¶41

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

¶42

4/4

V.Jeevarekha v. The Principal Secretary to the

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Jeevarekha v. The Principal Secretary to the

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

St. Antonys Girls Higher Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

S.Gunasekaran, Vs The Secretary to Government

Dr.v.K.Nelson, Vs Government of Tamil nadu

S. Balasubramanian, Vs The Director General of Police

Madras University Dr. Ambedkar Vs The University of Madras

P.Pritish Sam Jebaraj, Vs The Govt. of Tamil Nadu