Disposed

Mr.Tamas Alexander , Thomas Alexander D Cruz v. The Singareni Collieries Company Limited

Telangana HC17 Dec 2024WP/5768/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging service record age determination. Court did not determine merits; merely issued interim direction for recodified representation submission to employees.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to submit a fresh representation regarding date of birth; respondents directed to process it and pass orders within eight weeks.

Mr.Tamas Alexander , Thomas Alexander D… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³³⁰¹ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Speciat Originat Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK

¶6

WRIT PETI TION NO: 5768 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

!!IfgT3.^Alexander@ ^Thomas^{AlexanderD' Cruz, S/o. Anthony} Denise. Aoed aoour-ou years, Ogc_ E.C.No.1426186, e.No.Ti_60,8 incine Colony, Ramagundam,GV-8.incline, Karimnagar-Telangana.

¶9

.....PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director, Singareni Bhdvan, Khairat;bad, Hyd"ab;J.^--

¶12

Mls Singareni Collieries Company Ltd, A Govemment Company Godavari Khani No.1. Ramaoundam Aieat ilep by its Dy Generat tMaiJg6r-G-oda;ii Khani, KarimnagaiDistrict.

¶13

.....RESPONDENTS

¶14

Petition Under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent issued by the respondent- singareni collieries company Limited, determining the age of the petitioner as 23 years as on 25.09.1966 and fixing the date of superannuation ai 3'l .01.2023, as illegal and arbitrary and consequenfly to direct the respondent-company to rectify the same and incorporate the date of birth of the petitioner in his service records as 1g.02.1966 and permit him to continue in service up lo 31 .01 .2026 and consequenfly direct the respondents to considering the representation submitted by him in the interest of justice.

¶15

|.A.NO:1 OF 2023

¶16

Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to consider the representation made by the petitioner. To consider his representation by^perusing the material^paper on record and to correct his Name and Date of Birth by looking into the SSC Certificate, Bihar Secondary Board dated 11.07.1981. ln the interest of the workmen i.e. petitioner service record. By the Singareni Collieries Company Limited pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI B.BALAJI

¶18

Counsel for the Respondents : SRI P.SRI HARSHA REDDY (SC FOR StNGARENt COLLTERTES CO.LTD)

¶19

The Court made the following ORDER

¶20

t I

¶21

/ ,

¶22

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA I{ARTHIK

¶23

WRIT PETITION No.5768 of 2023

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

This Writ Petition, under Article^{226 of the Constitution of India, is}

¶26

filed seeking the following^relief

¶27

"...to issue an appropriate Writ,^{Order or Direction,more particularly} one in the nature of Writ of^{Mandamus, declaringthe actionof the 2"d} respondent issued by the respondent-^{SingareniCollieriesComPany} Limited, determining the age of^the Petitioner^{as 23 years as on} 25.09.1966 and fixing^{the date o[ superannuationas 31.O1.2023, as illegal} and arbitrary and consequently^{to direct the respondent-ComPanyto} rectify the same and incorporate the^{dateof birth of the petitioner in his} service up Lo 31.01.2026 and^{consequentlydirect the respondents to} considering the representation submitted^{by him in the interest of justice} and to pass..."

¶28

Though the present writ^{petitionis frled seeking the aforesaidrelief,} at the time of hearing, Sri^{B. Balaji,learned counsel appearing for the} petitioner, confined his arguments^{al.rd submittedthat the representations} of the petitioner dated^{21.O1.2021 arrd26.10} '2022^arepending consideration before the^{respondents.Therefore,learned counsel for the} petitioner prayed this Court^. to^{permit the petitionerto submit a fresh} representation to the respondents,^{seekingrectiflcationof his date of birth,} andconsequently,soughtadirectiontotherespondentstoconsiderthe saflIe and pass necessary^{orderswithin a reasonableperiod of time'}

¶29

Sri P. Sri Harsha^{Reddy, learnedStalding Counselforthe} respondents, fairly submits^{that the respondentswill considerthe}

¶30

¶31

PK, J W.P.No.5768 oJ 2O23

¶32

representation of the petitioner, as and when received, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶33

4' Having rcgard to the submissions made by Iearned counser for the respective parties, without going into merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to make a fresh representation to the respondents, ventilating his grievance, within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such representation fiom the petitioner, the respondents shall pass appropriate orders thereon, strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably withi, a period of eight (og) weeks thereof, and communicate a copy thereof to the petitioner.

¶34

Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall

¶35

stand closed. No costs.

¶36

SD/.P.PADMANABHA ASSrsrANr =;7* REDDY //TRUE COPY//

SEGTION dTTICER

The Chairman and Managing Director,^{Singareni Collieries Company Limited'} Singareni Bhavan, Khairatabad, Hyderabad.

¶41

The Deputy General Manager, M/s Singareni^{Collieries CompanyLtd,A} Govemmeht Company Godavari Khani^{No.1, Ramagundam Areal Godavari} Khani, Karimnagar District.

¶42

One CC to SRI B.BALAJI, Advocate [OPUC]

¶43

One CC to SRI P.SRI HARSHA REDDY^{(SC FOR SINGARENI COLLIERIES} CO.LTD) Advocate [OPUC]

¶44

Two CD Copies

HIGH COURT

DATED:1711212024

i{ rlE S f,l 14:
('
o
U.
2 B 0Et] zuZa
t".sparc r,i9 ,

ORDER

WP.No.5768 of 2023

DISPOSING OF THE W.P

WITHOUT COSTS.

w
I

Mr.Tamas Alexander , Thomas Alexander D Cruz v. The Singareni Collieries Company Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.Tamas Alexander , Thomas Alexander D Cruz v. The Singareni Collieries Company Limited

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

Mandaloju Sriramulu Vs The Singareni Collieries Company Limited

Dr.G.E.Ch.Vidyasagar Vs The State of Telangana

Dr.P.Laxminarayana Vs The State of Telangana and 6 others

Thotamalla Nageswara Rao Vs The Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd.

Vallabhi Suresh Vs The State of Telangana

Narlagiri Santhosh, Vs The State of Telangana