Disposed

K.Chakravarthy v. The Inspector General of Registration

Madras HC20 Nov 2023WP/7821/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that the statutory authority was in dereliction of duty for not considering the petitioner's representation regarding salary arrears. The Court directed the first and second respondents to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks without deciding the merits of the claim.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the first and second respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 15.07.2020 and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks.

K.Chakravarthy Vs The Inspector General of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.7821 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 20.11.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH

¶6

W.P.No.7821 of 2022

K.Chakravarthy

...Petitioner

1.The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Chennai – 600 028.

¶11

2.The District Registrar, Office of the District Registrar, Cheyyar – 604 407.

¶12

3.The Principal Accountant General (A&E) Tamil Nadu,

¶13

No.361, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 018.

¶14

...Respondents

¶15

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to disburse the arrears of pay due to the petitioner towards salary and surrender leave and private affairs leave payment period 21.10.1990 to 30.06.2013 without any further delay.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Murali

¶17

1/4

¶18

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

¶19

W.P.No.7821 of 2022

¶20

For R1 & R2 : Mrs.V.Yamuna Devi, Special Government Pleader For R3 : Mrs.Hema Muralikrishnan, Standing Counsel

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The petitioner herein had given a representation to the second respondent on 15.07.2020, seeking for payment of arrears of salary and other allowances. Thereafter, by letter dated 12.09.2020, the first respondent has directed the Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Vellore to take action on the petitioner's representation. Since there was no further progress, the petitioner has preferred the present Writ Petition.

¶23

It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this

¶24

nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast on them to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. As such, non-consideration of the representation by the Statutory Authority would amount to dereliction of duty and hence, this Court will be justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of

¶25

2/4

¶26

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

¶27

W.P.No.7821 of 2022

¶28

India and direct him to consider the same within a stipulated time.

¶29

In the light of the above observations, there shall be a direction

¶30

to the first and second respondents herein to consider the petitioner's representation dated 15.07.2020 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any of its views with regard to the merits of the claim made by the petitioner and that it is open to the concerned respondents to consider the same on its own merits.

¶31

4. With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶32

20.11.2023

¶33

Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order hvk

¶34

3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.7821 of 2022

M.S.RAMESH,J.

hvk

1.The Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Chennai – 600 028.

¶40

2.The District Registrar, Office of the District Registrar, Cheyyar – 604 407.

¶41

3.The Principal Accountant General (A&E) Tamil Nadu,

¶42

No.361, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 018.

¶43

W.P.No.7821 of 2022

¶44

20.11.2023

¶45

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

K.Chakravarthy v. The Inspector General of Registration

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Chakravarthy v. The Inspector General of Registration

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

A.Gunasekaran Vs M.Ganasan Mba

P.Ramesh Vs Manivasan IAS and another

S.Loganathan Vs R.Kumar

T.Saravanan Vs The District Collector

S.Sivakumar Vs M/s. SBI Life Insurance Co. Ltd.

E.Selvan, Vs the Senior Regional Manager