Disposed¶46

A.Rajamani v. the Joint Commissioner of Labour

Madras HC17 Jul 2025WP/17474/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Article 226 certiorarified mandamus; Right to Information Act reply dated 30.03.2021 (Na.Ka.No.E1/820/2021); Joint Commissioner of Labour and Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Vellore; Vellore District Consumer Cooperative Wholesale Stores; disbursal of Rs.71,642 with accrued interest; P.G. Case No.97 of 2015; W.P. No.7131 of 2025 allowed and writ appeal dismissed; one-month compliance timeline; release of deposited amount to workman/petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with a direction to the 1st and 2nd respondents to disburse the amount in accordance with law within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order; no order as to costs; connected Miscellaneous Petitions closed. ¶46

A.Rajamani Vs the Joint Commissioner of Labour — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶46

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents could continue to keep the petitioner's application for disbursement of the amount (deposited to the credit of P.G. Case No.97 of 2015) pending on the ground of pendency of W.P. No.7131 of 2025. +1 more

¶38

Court's answer

The respondents cannot keep the petitioner's disbursement application pending on the basis of the pendency of the writ petition, which was later allowed in favour of the petitioner, the appeal against which was also dismissed.

¶39

Ratio / Principle

The impugned notice is only a reply sent to the petitioner for the question sought for through the Right to Information Act.

¶37

Key takeaways

Respondents 1 and 2 are bound to disburse the amount in accordance with law; the petitioner may approach them, and the Court directed them to disburse the amount within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶44

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (P. Dhanabal, J.) — A. Rajamani v. The Joint Commissioner of Labour and others, W.P. No.17474 of 2023 (decided 17-07-2025): The impugned communication dated 30.03.2021 (Na.Ka.No.E1/820/2021) of the Joint Commissioner of Labour was held to be only a reply sent under the Right to Information Act to the petitioner's query. Since there was no denial that the petitioner's application to disburse the amount deposited to the credit of P.G. Case No.97 of 2015 remained pending, and since W.P. No.7131 of 2025 had been allowed in the petitioner's favour with the writ appeal against it dismissed, the respondents could not keep the disbursement application pending on the ground of that pendency. The 1st and 2nd respondents were directed to disburse the amount in accordance with law within one month from receipt of a copy of the order. Writ petition disposed of; no order as to costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

¶1

WP No. 17474 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 17-07-2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

¶6

WP No. 17474 of 2023 and W.M.P.Nos.16617 & 16618 of 2023

A.Rajamani

Petitioner

1.The Joint Commissioner Of Labour Amman Nagar, Melmovavor Nagar, Abdullahpuram, Vellore-632 010.

¶11

2.The Deputy Commissioner Of Labour Office Of The Joint Commissioner Of Labour Amman Nagar, Melmovavor Nagar, Abdullahpuram, Vellore-632 010.

¶12

3.Vellore District Consumer Cooperative Wholesale Stores, Rep. By Its Joint Registrar /Managing Director, Officers Line, Vellore-632 001.

¶13

Respondents

¶14

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

¶15

WP No. 17474 of 2023

¶16

PRAYER Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, c alling for the concerned records from the 1st respondent, quash the order of the 1st respondent dated 30.03.2021 bearing Na.Ka.No.E1/ 820/ 2021 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and consequently direct the 1st and 2nd respondent to disburse Rs.71,642/along with accrued interest deposited to the credit of P.G. Case No.97 of 2015 on the file of the 2nd respondent to the petitioner within the time frame stipulated by this Court and in accordance with law.

¶17

For Petitioner(s): Mr.Balan Haridas

¶18

For Respondent(s): Mr.LSM.Hasan Fizal Additional Government Pleader, for R1 & R2 M/s.A.Haseena Banu, for R3

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This writ petition is filed challenging the order passed by the information

¶21

authority under the Right to Information Act.

¶22

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the

¶23

petitioner already filed a petition to release the amount as per the order passed

¶24

by the appellate authority, the learned judge passed an order in the application.

¶25

Thereafter, the petitioner sought for information under the Right to Information

¶26

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

¶27

WP No. 17474 of 2023

¶28

Act, for that they gave reply stating that since the Writ Petition No.7131 of 2025

¶29

filed by the petitioner is pending they are unable to disburse the amount. Now,

¶30

the said writ petition was allowed and thereafter as against the said writ petition

¶31

order, writ appeal was filed and the same was also dismissed. Therefore, the 1st respondent has to disburse the amount.

¶32

3.The learned counsel for the 3rd respondent also not disputed the disposal

¶33

of the writ petition filed by the petitioner and writ appeal filed by the 3rd

¶34

respondent.

¶35

4.This Court heard both sides and perused the records.

¶36

5.On a careful perusal of the records, it is seen that the impugned notice is

¶37

only a reply sent to the petitioner for the question sought for through the Right

¶38

to Information Act. However, there is no denial by the respondents that the petitioner already filed the application to disburse the amount which is pending.

¶39

Therefore, the respondents cannot keep on pending the application based on the

¶40

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

¶41

WP No. 17474 of 2023

¶42

pendency of the writ petition. Later the writ petition was allowed in favour of

¶43

the petitioner and the appeal was also dismissed. Therefore, the respondent

¶44

nos.1 and 2 have to disburse the amount in accordance with law. The petitioner can approach the 1st and 2nd respondents for disbursing the amount. In view of the above, this Court directs the 1st and 2nd respondents to disburse the amount

¶45

within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶46

6.With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There is no

¶47

order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶48

17-07-2025

¶49

gbi

¶50

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