B.Asokan, v. Union Of India,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 4.12.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G.RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN W.P.No.31329 of 2017 B.Asokan Petitioner

Versus

1 Union of India Rep. by Additional Divisional Railway Manager-II Madras Southern Railway Park Town Chennai 600 003 2 The Senior Divisional Commercial Manager Madras Southern Railway Part Town Chennai 600 003 3 Chief Commercial Manager (Passenger and Marketing) Southern Railways Part Town Chennai.

4 The Registrar Central Administrative Tribunal Madras Bench Chennai.

Respondents Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 4th respondent to decide Original Application Nos.1489 and 1590 of 2017 filed by the petitioner at an early date.

For petitioner : Mr.M.Gnanasekar For RR1 to 3 : Mr.P.T.Ramkumar

ORDER

(Order of the court was made by HULUVADI G.RAMESH,J.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner and Mr.P.T.Ramkumar, learned counsel, who takes notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 3.

2. The writ petitioner sought for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the fourth respondent to decide the Original Applications in O.A.1489 and 1590 of 2017 at an early date and to pass appropriate orders.

3. According to the petitioner, despite the fact that there was no representation for the respondents, the Original Applications filed by him are being adjourned by the Central Administrative Tribunal to a longer date and hence, he seeks indulgence of this court.

4. The learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3 would submit that the Original Applications were filed only in the month of September and October 2017 and therefore, there is a practical difficulty in getting the matters disposed of so early when even counter has not been filed for which they require a reasonable time.

5. It appears that the matter is regarding promotion of the writ petitioner and some allegations are said to have been made against him. The probability of the petitioner being an innocent cannot be ignored and in such service matters, if no adjudication takes place at an early date, necessarily his promotion would be withheld and he would be victimised. Therefore, it is for the respondents to make it convenient to get the matters disposed of at an early date. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-VII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar ssk.

To:

1 The Additional Divisional Railway Manager-II Madras Southern Railway Park Town Chennai 600 003 2 The Senior Divisional Commercial Manager Madras Southern Railway Part Town Chennai 600 003

3 The Chief Commercial Manager (Passenger and Marketing) Southern Railways Part Town Chennai.

4 The Registrar Central Administrative Tribunal Madras Bench Chennai.

+ 1 cc to MR. M. Gnanasekar, Advocate SR.86521 + 1 cc to MR. P.T. Ramkumar, Advocate SR.86119 W.P.No.31329 of 2017 SSV(CO) EU(24/01/2018)