Allowed

John Jildoss .J v. The Principal Secretary

Madras HC6 Dec 2024CMP(MD)/2217/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition, filed to condone a delay of 381 days in filing a Writ Appeal (WA) against an order dated 15.12.2022, was allowed by the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench). The court condoned the delay on the petitioner paying a sum of Rs. 5,000 to the District Siddha Medical Officer.

What did the court decide?

The petition is allowed and the delay is condoned on condition that the petitioner pays a sum of Rs.5,000 to the District Siddha Medical Officer, CCRI, Periyakulam, within two weeks.

John Jildoss .J Vs The Principal Secretary — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

CMP(MD) No.2217 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction )

¶3

Friday, the Sixth day of December Two Thousand and Twenty Four

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH and The HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.D. MARIA CLETE

¶6

CMP(MD) No.2217 of 2024 IN WA(MD) No. SR80024 of 2023

¶7

J.JOHN JILDOSS ... PETITIONER/APPELLANT

¶8

¶9

1 THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU, SECRETARIAT, CHENNAI

¶10

2 THE COMMISSIONER OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, DPI CAMPUS, CHENNAI

¶11

3 THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, DPI CAMPUS, CHENNAI

¶12

4 THE DIRECTOR OF MATRICULATION SCHOOLS, DPI CAMPUS, CHENNAI

¶13

5 THE CHIEF EDUCATIONAL OFFICER CHIEF EDUCATIONAL OFFICE, MADURAI

¶14

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

¶15

1/5

¶16

CMP(MD) No.2217 of 2024

¶17

6 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICE, MELUR, MADURAI DISTRICT.

¶18

7 DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICE, TIRUMANGALAM

¶19

8 THE DIRECTOR LAKSHMI VIDYA SANGAM, T.V.S. NAGAR, PALANGANATHAM, MADURAI

¶20

9 THE PRINCIPAL LAKSHMI SCHOOL, VEERAPANCHAN, MADURAI

¶21

10 THE PRINCIPAL THE TVS SCHOOL, T.V.S.NAGAR, PALANGANATHAM, MADURAI ... RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

¶22

Petition filed praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court may be pleased to Condone the delay of 381 days in filing the WA SR No.80027/2023 agains the order dated 15.12.2022 made in WP(MD). No.28211 of 2022 on the file of this Honourable Court.

¶23

Prayer in WA(MD) No. SR80024 of 2023 :

¶24

To set aside the order dated 15.12.2022 made in WP(MD)No.28211 of 2022 on the file of this Hon'ble Court and allow this Writ Appeal.

¶25

Prayer in WP(MD). 28211/ 2022 :

¶26

To issue of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned proceedings in RC.No. 10060/A4/ 2021 dated 05.04.2022 passed by the 5th respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the 3rd to 7th respondents to order the 8th to 10th respondents to reimburse the 14 months salary deduction Rs.96,194/- and to reinstate the petitioner to the service.

¶27

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

¶28

2/5

¶29

CMP(MD) No.2217 of 2024

¶30

ORDER : This petition coming up for orders on this day, upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of MR.T.SELVAN, Advocate for the petitioner and of MR.J.ASHOK, Additional Government Pleader on behalf of the Respondent Nos.1 to 7 and MR.V.RAMAKRISHNAN, Advocate on behalf of the Respondent Nos.8 to 10, the court made the following order:-

¶31

[Order of the Court was made by M.S.RAMESH, J.]

¶32

Having been satisfied with the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit filed in support of the petition, this petition is allowed and the delay is condoned on condition that the petitioner pays a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) to the credit of Account No.10767823177 [State Bank of India], towards District Siddha

¶33

Medical Officer, CCRI, Periyakulam, within a period of two [2] weeks from today.

¶34

2.The Registry shall not number the Writ Appeal, if the receipt of the payment of cost is not enclosed.

¶35

sd/06/12/2024 / TRUE COPY /

¶36

/12/2024

¶37

Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S. I / II / III / IV ) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.

¶38

¶39

¶40

1 THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis SECRETARIAT, CHENNAI

¶41

3/5

¶42

CMP(MD) No.2217 of 2024

¶43

2 THE COMMISSIONER OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, DPI CAMPUS, CHENNAI

¶44

3 THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, DPI CAMPUS, CHENNAI

¶45

4 THE DIRECTOR OF MATRICULATION SCHOOLS, DPI CAMPUS, CHENNAI

¶46

5 THE CHIEF EDUCATIONAL OFFICER CHIEF EDUCATIONAL OFFICE, MADURAI

¶47

6 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICE, MELUR, MADURAI DISTRICT.

¶48

7 DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICE, TIRUMANGALAM.

¶49

COPY TO

¶50

1 THE SUB ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, A.E.SECTION, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶51

2 THE SECTION OFFICER, JUDICIAL SECTION, MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT, MADURAI.

¶52

3 THE DISTRICT SIDDHA MEDICAL OFFICER, CCRI, PERIYAKULAM, THENI.

¶53

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

¶54

4/5

¶55

CMP(MD) No.2217 of 2024

¶56

ORDER IN CMP(MD) No.2217 of 2024 IN WA(MD) No. SR80024 of 2023 Date :06/12/2024

¶57

RS/GSV/SAR-(18.12.2024) 5P 11C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023

¶58

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

¶59

5/5

John Jildoss .J v. The Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

John Jildoss .J v. The Principal Secretary

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

T. Ramanigopaal, Vs The Commissioner of Land Administration

The Commissioner Vs Raman @ Ondachi Poosari

The Managing Director Vs P.Marimuthu

M. Kumarasamy Health and Educational Trust Vs The Commissioner

The Assistant Settlement Oflficer North Vs Dr G Govindharaju died 1.G.Selvaraju

Chinnamuthanan Vs State of Tamil Nadu