Madras High CourtWP/26461/2004closed

S.Veranan Surpevisor Of Shcool v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep.By

2018-12-10Honourable Mr Justice S.M. Subramaniam3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED :10.12.2018

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No.26461 of 2004 and W.M.P.Nos.32212 of 2004 and 89 of 2009 S.Veeranan, ..Petitioner vs 1.The State of Tamilnadu, rep. By the Secretary to Government, Social Welfare Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.

2.The Special Commissioner & Director of Most Backward Classes & Denotified Communities Welfare, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.

3.The Special Deputy Collector, Kallar Reclamation, Madurai-20.

4.The Headmaster, Government Kallar Reclamation Higher Secondary School, Papapatti, Madurai District.

5.The Accounts Officer, Accountant General (Accounts & Entitlements) Tamilnadu, Chennai-600 018.

6.The Treasury Officer, Madurai.

.. Respondents Prayer:

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified

Mandamus, to call for all relevant records relating to the impugned proceedings in P 17/3/V 18-391/RN/04-05 dated 26.8.2004 passed by the 5th respondent herein and quash the same as arbitrary, unreasonable, improper, illegal, against the rules and regulations of the respondents and thereby direct the respondents herein to pay the original pension to the petitioner in future.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Srinivasan For Respondents : Mr.A.Raja Perumal AGP for R1 to R4 and R6 : M/s.T.S. Selva Rani for R5

O R D E R

The learned counsel for the respondents furnished the copy of the Official proceedings issued by the Office of the Accountant General (Accounts & Entitlements) TamilNadu, Chennai in proceedings in Pen.17/13/Rn/06-07/23 dated 02.8.2006, wherein the pay of the writ petitioner had been revised. 2.The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents states that the grievance of the writ petitioner had already been redressed and pay admissible by him was already granted. This apart, the excess amount recovered also was reimbursed to the writ petitioner.

3.In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondents, no further adjudication needs to be entertained in respect of the grounds raised in this writ petition. If at all any grievance exists still to the writ petitioner, it is left open to him to redress the same in the manner known to law. 4.With these observations, the writ petition stands closed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

mpa Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VIII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Secretary to Government, Social Welfare Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.