The Madras High Court directed respondents to consider the petitioner's representation regarding pay fixation from 01.02.1996 to 13.03.1998 within six weeks, holding non-consideration as dereliction of duty.
Direction to consider the representation dated 24.07.2023 on merits within six weeks from receipt of order copy.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.(MD)No.11600 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 04.06.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
W.P.(MD)No.11600 of 2024 & W.M.P.(MD)No.10328 of 2024
S.Rathinavelu ... Petitioner
vs.
Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Service, Tenkasi - District.
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to fix the salary for the petitioner, from 01.02.1996 to 13.03.1998, the retirement date, and thereby calculate the other perks and incentives, increments, subsequent hikes etc., over and above the same fixation of Rs. 2,900/- until the retirement and subsequent pension etc.
For Petitioner : Mr.F.X.Eugene
For Respondents : Mr.N.Ramesh Arumugam, Government Advocate
1/5
W.P.(MD)No.11600 of 2024
O R D E R
The petitioner herein, who retired as a Senior Veterinary and Livestock Supervisor on 13.03.1998, had given several representations to the respondents seeking to fix his pay on par with the other employees working as Senior Veterinary and Livestock Supervisor w.e.f. 01.02.1996 till 13.03.1998. Last such representation was made on 24.07.2023. Since the representations were not considered, the present writ petition has been filed.
2. It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon them to consider the same on their 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. The failure on the part of the Authority had prompted the petitioner to file this petition seeking relief through issuance of writ of mandamus. As the petitioner has made out a case for invoking the extraordinary powers of this Court under Article
2/5
W.P.(MD)No.11600 of 2024
226 of the Constitution of India, the respondents are required to be given with a direction to consider the representation of the petitioner within a specified time frame.
3. In the light of the above observations, there shall be a
direction to the respondents herein to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.07.2023 on their own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the claim of the petitioner and it is open to the respondents to consider the same on their own merits.
of . No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition was closed.
04.06.2024
NCC: Yes/No Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking order mbi
3/5
W.P.(MD)No.11600 of 2024
To
4/5
W.P.(MD)No.11600 of 2024
R.N.MANJULA, J.
mbi
W.P.(MD)No.11600 of 2024
04.06.2024
5/5
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the authorities have a duty to consider a representation seeking pay fixation within the specified skeletal scheme time.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
S.Rathinavelu
The Director, Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Service, Tenkasi - District
The Principal Secretary, Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 09
R.N. Manjula
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
