Court treated unissued quantum meruit proceedings as a show cause notice in a writ petition filed by a Municipal Engineer. Petitioner granted two weeks to submit representations ante merits review.
Petition disposed; impugned proceedings treated as show cause notice; petitioner granted 2 weeks to submit; recovery suspended.
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.16168 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 22.07.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
W.P.(MD)No.16168 of 2024 & W.M.P.(MD)Nos.14061 & 14062 of 2024
B.Sakthivel
... Petitioner
vs.
2.The Commissioner, Rameshwaram Municipal Office, 23(1), Varthagan Street, Rameshwaram District.
3.The Commissioner, Padmanabapuram Municipality, O/o.The Padmanabapuram Municipality, Padmanabapuram, 15-60, Palace Road, Thuckalay, Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.692/2024/C1 dated 05.06.2024 and quash the same as illegal.
1/5
W.P.(MD)No.16168 of 2024
For Petitioner : Mr.H.Mohammed Imran for M/s.Ajmal Associates For Respondents : Mr.S.Shanmugavel Additional Government Pleader for R1
Mr.K.Saravanan Standing Counsel for R2 and R3
O R D E R
Heard Mr.H.Mohammed Imran, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner, Mr.S.Shanmugavel, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent and Mr.K.Saravanan, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 2 and 3.
2. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking to quash the impugned proceedings of the second respondent in Na.Ka.No. 692/2024/C1 dated 05.06.2024 as illegal.
3. The petitioner who is working as a Municipal Engineer has suffered recovery in view of the impugned proceedings. The impugned proceedings has been issued by the second respondent to the third respondent on the basis of the audit objection No.85 pertaining to the 2/5
W.P.(MD)No.16168 of 2024
financial year 2013-14. In the impugned proceedings, it is stated that the petitioner has been given with monetary benefit with effect from the date which is not eligible and hence, recovery to be made in installments.
4. Mr.H.Mohammed Imran, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner submitted that before passing such an order, no notice has been given to the petitioner.
5. It appears that the copy of the impugned proceedings has not been served upon the petitioner and only at his request, the copy of the proceedings has been served to him. Even if the audit objection is correct, that has to be made known to the petitioner, who is going to be the aggrieved party. In such case, the impugned proceedings itself can be considered as notice and the petitioner can be given with an opportunity to make his submissions before passing an order in this regard.
6. In view of the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of and the impugned proceedings of the second respondent is
3/5
W.P.(MD)No.16168 of 2024
allowed to be treated as show cause notice and the petitioner is at liberty to make his submissions within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of the same, the respondents shall consider the same on merits and pass appropriate orders within a period of four weeks thereon. It is needless to state that till such time, no further recovery be made. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
22.07.2024
NCC: Yes/No Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking order mbi
To
The Director of Municipal Administration, Chepauk, Chennai - 5.
4/5
W.P.(MD)No.16168 of 2024
R.N.MANJULA, J.
mbi
W.P.(MD)No.16168 of 2024
22.07.2024
5/5
2 issues framed by the court
Whether quantum meruit proceedings initiated without prior notice can be maintained.
Whether petitioner is entitled to opportunity to be heard before recovery proceedings are finalized.
B. Sakthivel
The Director of Municipal Administration, Chepauk
The Commissioner, Rameshwaram Municipal Office
The Commissioner, Padmanabapuram Municipality
R.N. MANJULA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
