G.Tamilmani, v. Union Of India,

In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated: 17.04.2014 Coram:

The Hon'ble Mr.Justice M.Jaichandren and The Hon'ble Mr.Justice T.Mathivanan W.P. No.11243 of 2015 G.Tamilmani ..

Petitioner vs.

1.Union of India, rep. by the Chief Post Master General, Chennai.

2.The Post Master General,Western Region Coimbatore.

3.The Superintendent of Post Office, Salem.west Division.

4.The Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench, rep. by its Registrar ..

Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the entire records in DY 8299/2013 in CA CP/310/00130/2014, dated 1.12.2014 in OA 456/2003 on the file of the 4th respondent, quash the same and consequently direct respondents 1 to 3 to regularize the service of the petitioner in the post of Group D cleaner, DMMS w.e.f. 22.1.2001 as per the order made in O.A.No.456 of 2003 dated 25.8.2003 passed by the 4th respondent with all consequential monetary benefits.

For petitioner :

Mr.N.Naganathan

O R D E R

[by M.Jaichandren, J.] \ This Writ Petition has been filed against the order passed by the 4th respondent-Tribunal, dated 1.12.2014, made in Contempt Application No.310/00130 of 2014.

2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner/applicant has referred to paragraph No.2 of the order

passed by the Tribunal, dated 1.12.2014, which reads as follows:- "2.When the matter came up for hearing today, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the respondents have fully complied with the orders of this Tribunal in OA No.456 of 2003, dated 25.8.2003. Learned counsel for the applicant was present and also agreed with the statement made by the learned counsel for the respondents."

3. From the above extracted paragraph, it could be seen that, at the stage of the hearing of the Contempt Application, the learned counsel who appeared on behalf of the respondents therein had submitted that the order passed by the Tribunal, in OA No.456 of 2003, dated 25.8.2003, had been fully complied with. It had also been noted that the learned counsel for the applicant, who was present before the Tribunal, had agreed with the statement made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. In such circumstances, the Contempt Application had been closed by the Tribunal.

4. Today, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had contended that the respondents had failed to comply with the order passed by the Tribunal, in OA No.456 of 2003, dated 25.8.2003. The learned counsel had also contended that he did not agree with the statement made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, as has been stated in paragraph No.2 of the impugned order, dated 1.12.2014, in Contempt Application No.310/00130 of 2014.

5. We find no reasons to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal, dated 1.12.2014, as it has been clearly stated in paragraph No.2 of the impugned order, dated 1.12.2014, that the respondents have fully complied with the order passed by the Tribunal, in OA No.456 of 2003, dated 25.8.2003, which statement had been agreed to by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner/applicant. In such circumstances, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. However, we make it clear that, if at all the petitioner has any clarification to be made, in respect of the impugned order, dated 1.12.2014, it may be open to him to get the impugned order clarified, by moving the Tribunal, by filing an appropriate application. No costs. M.P.No.1 of 2015 is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar gs.

To 1.The Chief Post Master General, Union of India, Chennai.

2.The Post Master General, Coimbatore.

3.The Superintendent of Post Office, Salem.

4.The Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench, rep. by its Registrar.

1 cc to Mr.N.Naganathan ,Advocate, SR.No.21162 W.P.No.11243 of 2015 rj(co) pmk.27.4.2015