Disposed

Sakthi Muppidathi. v. The General Manager

Madras HC3 Dec 2024WP(MD)/9508/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment dismissed a writ petition challenging an impugned order that referred a petitioner-driver to a medical board. The court closed the petition and connected miscellaneous petitions because the petitioner died during the pendency of the case and the respondent had already settled all monetary benefits to the wife.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed with no costs awarded.

Sakthi Muppidathi. Vs The General Manager — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.9508 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 03.12.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

¶6

W.P(MD)No.9508 of 2021 and WMP(MD) Nos.7236 & 7237 of 2021

Sakthi Muppidathi

... Petitioner

The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd, Thamirabarani, Tirunelveli District.

¶11

...Respondent

¶12

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the respondent resulting in the respondent's impugned Letter in 14113/Ni.Ya 11/ Tha.A.Po.Ka/ Thi.Li/ 2013 dt 28.4.2021 passed by the respondent and quash the same and directing the respondent to allow him to continue to work and pay salary in the post of Non ITI Helper bearing KA no. 10811 at Senkottai Branch and consequently to pay all the salary for the period the petitioner was not permitted to work and pay all the attendant and monetary benefits.

¶13

1/4

¶14

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

¶15

W.P(MD)No.9508 of 2021

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.V.R.Venkatesan For Respondent : Mr.R.Rajamohan Standing Counsel

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

The petitioner, a driver of the Tamil Nadu State

¶19

Transport Corporation Ltd, Thamirabarani has filed this writ petition challenging the order passed by the respondent, dated 28.04.2021, referring the petitioner to Medical Board as he was having certain ailments.

¶20

Today(03.12.2024), when this writ petition is taken

¶21

up for final hearing, the learned counsel on either side submits that pending this writ petition, the petitioner died on 04.12.2022. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation submits that the entire monetary benefits due to this petitioner has already been settled to the petitioner's wife.

¶22

3.Recording the aforesaid submission that the petitioner

¶23

died and the entire monetary benefits due to this petitioner has

¶24

2/4

¶25

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

¶26

W.P(MD)No.9508 of 2021

¶27

already been settled to the petitioner's wife by the respondent Corporation, this writ petition is closed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶28

03.12.2024

¶29

NCC:Yes/No Index:Yes vrn To The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd, Thamirabarani, Tirunelveli District.

¶30

3/4

¶31

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

¶32

W.P(MD)No.9508 of 2021

¶33

B.PUGALENDHI, J.

¶34

vrn

¶35

Order made in W.P(MD)No.9508 of 2021 and WMP(MD) Nos.7236 & 7237 of 2021

¶36

03.12.2024

¶37

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

¶38

4/4

Sakthi Muppidathi. v. The General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sakthi Muppidathi. v. The General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr.S.Subramani Vs the Director of Public

Arunkumar.B Vs Tamil Nadu State Commission for Protection Child Rights

Karuppiah.K Vs the Chief Educational Officer

R.Rajagopal, Vs the Director

K.Santhanam Vs the Director

Thangababy.S Vs the Chairman Cum Managing Director