Disposed¶20

K.Suresh John, v. Madras Fertilizers Ltd.

Madras HC1 Jul 2026WP/29156/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mooted writ petition closed without adjudication. Keywords: Article 226; Certiorarified Mandamus; Madras Fertilizers Ltd; resignation effective 04.01.2008 as Chief Manager; Show Cause No.Nil dated 01.09.2008; Memorandum No.Nil dated 02.01.2009; Order No.Nil dated 04.06.2009; terminal and service benefits with interest; dues settled during pendency; endorsement by counsel; petition closed; no costs. Useful only as evidence that the employer settled post-resignation dues; carries no holding on legality or jurisdiction of the impugned communications.

What did the court decide?

Recording learned counsel for the petitioner's submission, and the endorsement made in the case bundle, that during the pendency of the writ petition the respondents settled all dues payable to the petitioner, the writ petition is closed with no costs. ¶20

K.Suresh John, Vs Madras Fertilizers Ltd. — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

WP No. 29156 of 2010

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 01-07-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR

¶6

WP No. 29156 of 2010

K.Suresh John

..Petitioner

Madras Fertilizers Ltd, Rep. By Its Chairman, Manali, Chennai-68.

¶11

The General Manager (Personnel & Administration), Madras Fertilizers Ltd, Manali, Chennai-68.

¶12

..Respondents

¶13

Prayer: Petition filed under 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, praying to call for records relating to the Show Cause No.Nil dated 01.09.2008 issued by the 2nd respondent read with the Memorandum No.Nil dated 02.01.2009 of the 2nd respondent along with the Order No.Nil dated 04.06.2009 issued by the 2nd respondent and quash the same as being illegal, without jurisdiction, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to settle the terminal and service benefits due to the petitioner on basis of his resignation with effect from 04.01.2008 from the services of the 2nd respondent as Chief Manager with interest.

¶14

For Petitioner: Mr. C.V. Vishnu for Mr.C.K.Chandrasekkar For Respondents: Mr.Jayash B. Dolia Senior Advocate for Ms.Varsha for M/s.Aiyar and Dolia

¶15

Page1 of 3

¶16

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

¶17

WP No. 29156 of 2010

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of the writ petition, the respondents have settled all the dues payable to the petitioner. He also made an endorsement in the case bundle.

¶20