Partly allowed

B.Kulamani v. the Registrar General

Madras HC4 Mar 2024WP/36942/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging an order of compulsory retirement in public interest was disposed of by confirming the retirement. The court directed the respondents to settle terminal and pensionary benefits within twelve weeks, conditional on the petitioner accepting the order and cooperating.

What did the court decide?

Confirmation of compulsory retirement order; directions to respondents to settle pension and terminal benefits within 12 weeks; direction to petitioner to cooperate in pension settlement.

B.Kulamani Vs the Registrar General — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

2024:MHC:1311

¶2

WP No.36942 of 2007

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶4

DATED : 04-03-2024

¶5

CORAM

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M. SUBRAMANIAM And THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

¶7

WP No.36942 of 2007

B.Kulamani

.. Petitioner

-vs-

1.The Registrar General of High Court, Chennai-600 104.

¶12

2.The Secretary to Government, Home (Cts.IA) Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. .. Respondents

¶13

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records from the file of the second respondent vide G.O.(2D) No.458, dated 13.07.2007 and quash the same as null and void and consequently

¶14

Page 1 of 6

¶15

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

¶16

WP No.36942 of 2007

¶17

wages.

¶18

direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service with back wages.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sankarasubbu For Respondent-1 : Mr.A.Jenasenan For Respondent-2 : Ms.P.Raja Rajeswari, Government Advocate.

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

[ORDER OF THE COURT WAS MADE

¶22

BY S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.]

¶23

The writ on hand has been instituted challenging the order of

¶24

the second respondent dated G.O.(2D).No.458 dated 13.07.2007. Further direction is sought for to reinstate the petitioner into service with back wages and other consequential benefits.

¶25

The petitioner was compulsorily retired in public interest

¶26

under FR 56 (2). The Division Bench of this Court passed final orders dismissing the writ petition on 27.03.2008 filed by the writ petitioner, challenging the order of compulsory retirement in public interest. The

¶27

Page 2 of 6

¶28

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

¶29

WP No.36942 of 2007

¶30

review petition filed by the petitioner was allowed.

¶31

The respondent preferred an appeal before the Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) Appeal No.5367 of 2017. The said civil appeal is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.

¶32

During the pendency of the Civil Appeal before the Apex Court, the present writ petition is listed before us, based on the order passed in the review petition. The petitioner-in-person appeared before us along with his learned counsel Mr.R.Sankarasubbu. An affidavit has been filed before this Court by the petitioner stating that the petitioner is accepting the order of compulsory retirement passed in G.O.(2D) No.458, dated 13.07.2007. We have orally asked the petitioner Mr.B.Kulamani, who in turn deposed before this Court stating that he is willing to accept the order of compulsory retirement issued in public interest and pension due to him may be settled. Based on the affidavit and based on the oral submission made by the petitioner-in-person along with his learned counsel Mr.R.Sankarasubbu and the second respondent has no serious dispute about such acceptance, we are inclined to pass the following orders:-

¶33

Page 3 of 6

¶34

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

¶35

WP No.36942 of 2007

¶36

(1) The order of compulsory retirement passed in public

¶37

interest issued in G.O.(2D). No.458, Home (Courts-I) Department, dated

¶38

13.07.2007 stands confirmed. Consequently, the respondents are directed to

¶39

settle all terminal and pensionary benefits due to the writ petitioner in accordance with the Rules and by following the procedures, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶40

(2) The petitioner is directed to cooperate with the respondents

¶41

for the purpose of settling the pension by producing necessary documents and in the prescribed format.

¶42

With the above directions, the present writ petition stands

¶43

disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶44

(S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.) (K.RAJASEKAR,J.)

¶45

04-03-2024

¶46

Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Speaking order/Non-Speaking order Neutral Citation : Yes/No Svn

¶47

Page 4 of 6

¶48

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

¶49

WP No.36942 of 2007

¶50

¶51

1.The Registrar General of High Court, Chennai-600 104.

¶52

2.The Secretary to Government, Home (Cts.IA) Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

¶53

Page 5 of 6

¶54

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

¶55

WP No.36942 of 2007

¶56

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. AND K.RAJASEKAR, J.

Svn

WP 36942 of 2007

04-03-2024

Page 6 of 6

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

B.Kulamani v. the Registrar General

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Kulamani v. the Registrar General

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

S.Padmanabhan Vs the Principal Secretary

G.Nagaraj Vs The Registrar General

N.Amudha Vs The Registrar General

P.Elangovan Vs the Registrar General

P.Ponnusamy Vs The Registrar General

A.Periannan Vs The Registrar General