Disposed

N.Mathayan v. the Assistant Director of

Madras HC20 Mar 2025WP(MD)/11745/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A retired Special Tahsildar sought revision of his scale of pay under G.O(Ms).No.303 Finance (pay cell) Department dated 11.10.2017 and consequential monetary benefits, alleging his option letter of 06.09.2018 was pending. The Court, without going into merits, directed the second respondent to consider the representation on merits within twelve weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to second respondent to consider petitioner's representation dated 06.09.2018 on merits within twelve weeks; no costs.

N.Mathayan Vs the Assistant Director of — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

WP(MD)No.11745 of 2019

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 20.03.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN

¶6

WP(MD)No.11745 of 2019

N.Mathaiyan

.. Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records, Collectorate Office, Tirunelveli – 9.

¶11

2.The Special Thasildar, River Linking Project Unit-3, Tirunelveli. .. Respondents

¶12

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus in the nature of writ directing the respondents to revise the petitioner's scale of pay in accordance with G.O(Ms).No.303 Finance (pay cell) Department dated 11.10.2017 and pay all consequential monetary benefit thereon within stipulated time to be framed.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kumar

¶14

For Respondents : Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh Additional Government Pleader

¶15

Page 1 of 5

¶16

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

¶17

WP(MD)No.11745 of 2019

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The writ petition has been filed directing the respondents to revise scale of pay in accordance with 303 Finance (pay cell) department dated 11.10.2017 and pay all consequential monetary benefits.

¶20

The case of the writ petitioner is that he joined as field assistant in Survey and Land records in Dharamapuri District in the year 2007, he was promoted to the post of Surveyor and in the year 2011 he was promoted to the post of Sub-Inspector, Surveyor. While so, on 07.05.2015, he was placed under suspension. Hence he preferred a W.P.No.35496 of 2016 before the Principal Seat of Madras and the same was allowed on 25.01.2016. Challenging the same, the department had filed an appeal in W.A.No.883 of 2017. The Hon'ble Division Bench was pleased to dispose of the same and conclude the criminal case within a period of three months. Subsequently, the suspension was revoked on 30.05.2018 and he was transferred to Tirunelveli on next day 04.05.2018, he joined duty as a Special Tahsildar Land Acquisition River Linking Project, again on 18.01.2019, he was transferred namely to Special Tahsildar Office and his retirement was due on 31.5.2019, the government employee had two to three months of retirement, from the

¶21

_________Page 2 of 5

¶22

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

¶23

WP(MD)No.11745 of 2019

¶24

date of coming into force of this Rules framed by the government in GO(Ms).No.303 Finance (pay cell) Department dated 11.10.2017, in terms of the said Rule, he exercised his option for revision of scale of pay through letter dated 06.09.2018 addressed to Special Tahsildar River Linking Project Unit - 3 and the same was forwarded to the first respondent but till date, the respondents have not revised in terms of the aforesaid GO. Hence, this writ petition.

¶25

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the writ petitioner submitted a representation dated 06.09.2018 before the second respondent and the same has been forwarded to the first respondent, till date the respondents have not revised his scale of pay in terms of 303 Finance (pay cell) department dated 11.10.2017. He would submit that the writ petitioner was permitted to retire on service on 31.05.2019.

¶26

The learned Additional Government leader for the respondent would submit that the representation dated 08.09.2018 submitted by the writ petitioner is still pending for consideration with the second respondent.

¶27

4(i). The relief sought for in this writ petition is limited only to

¶28

_________Page 3 of 5

¶29

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

¶30

WP(MD)No.11745 of 2019

¶31

consider the representation. The learned Additional Government Pleader has no serious objection to consider the same. Without going into merit of the case, this Court is inclined to issue a direction to the second respondent to consider the representation dated 06.09.2018 submitted by the petitioner on merits, in accordance with law if there is no legal impediment within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶32

With the above observations and directions this writ petition

¶33

stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶34

20.03.2025

¶35

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes nst To

¶36

1.The Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records, Collectorate Office, Tirunelveli – 9.

¶37

2.The Special Thasildar, River Linking Project Unit-3, Tirunelveli.

¶38

_________Page 4 of 5

¶39

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

¶40

WP(MD)No.11745 of 2019

¶41

M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.

¶42

nst

¶43

WP(MD)No.11745 of 2019

¶44

Dated: 20.03.2025

¶45

_________Page 5 of 5

¶46

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

N.Mathayan v. the Assistant Director of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Mathayan v. the Assistant Director of

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

K.Velusamy, Vs Directorate of Rural

Mariappan Vs The Director

R.Krishnasamy Vs the Asst.Commissioner

M.Manikandan Vs The District Collector

Kannan Vs the Addl.Prl.Secretary to Govt.

M.Manoharan, Vs the Managing Director