A.D.Venkatraman v. The Deputy Inspector General / Caso,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 20.04.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR W.P.No.9585 of 2022 and W.M.P No.9319 of 2022 A.D.Venkatraman

...Petitioner

Vs.

1. The Deputy Inspector General/ CASO,CISF Unit, ASG, Chennai.

2. The Commandant, Chennai ASG, CISF Unit, Chennai.

...Respondents

Prayer:Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the respondents, especially the 2nd respondent made in No.V-15014/CISF/ASG(ch)/Maj-4/ADVR/18/3539 dated 02.11.2018 issued removing the petitioner from service and consequently confirmed by the 1st respondent made in No.V15014/CISF/ASG(Ch)Disc/Appeal/2019/615 dated 26.03.2019 and quash the same as null and void, illegal and invalid and consequently directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service with all service and monetary benefits. For Petitioner : Mr.D.Padmanabhan For Respondents: Mr.P.R.Ramesh Babu Standing Panel Counsel

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the respondents, especially the 2nd respondent made in No.V15014/CSIF/ASG(ch)/Maj-4/ADVR/18/3539 dated 02.11.2018 issued removing the petitioner from service and consequently confirmed by the 1st respondent made in No.V15014/CSIF/ASG(Ch)Disc/ Appeal/2019/615 dated 26.03.2019 and quash the same as null and void, illegal and invalid and consequently directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service with all https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

service and monetary benefits.

2.Mr.P.R.Ramesh Babu, learned Standing Panel Counsel takes notice for the respondents and stated that the petitioner has filed this writ petition without exhausting the alternative remedy before the Appellate Authority under Section 54 of the Central Industrial Security Force Act, 1968 and therefore, the petition is liable to be rejected as not maintainable. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner made a request before this Court that liberty may granted to the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority, challenging the aforesaid dismissal order.

4.In view of the aforesaid submission made by the parties, it is made clear that the petitioner has approached this Court without exhausting the alternative remedy before the Appellate Authority under Section 54 of the Central Industrial Security Force Act, 1968. Hence, this Writ Petition stands dismissed as not maintainable. No costs. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to seek his remedy before the Appellate Authority, challenging the aforesaid dismissal order, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-IX) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar uma To

1. The Deputy Inspector General/CASO, CISF Unit, ASG, Chennai.

2. The Commandant, Chennai ASG, CISF Unit, Chennai.

+1cc to Mr.P.R.Ramesh Babu, Advocate, S.R.No.27105 W.P.No.9585 of 2022 and W.M.P No.9319 of 2022 PA(CO) RGA(27/05/2022) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/