A.Ganesan v. The District Collector,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 10.06.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN A.Ganesan ... Petitioner Vs.

The District Collector, Salem.

... Respondent Prayer:

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent herein to consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.04.2024 and to revise and regularize the provisional pension already sanctioned to the petitioner's father, Thiru.T.C.Ayyadurai, Tahsildar (Retired) from the date of his retirement on superannuation on 30.06.1987 till the date of his death on 11.01.2015 with pensionary benefits. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sarathkumar for Mr.C.Prakasam For Respondent : Mr.G.Nanmaran, Special Government Pleader 1/5

ORDER

The instant writ petition has been filed with a prayer for issuing a Mandamus, to direct the respondent herein to consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.04.2024 and to revise and regularize the provisional pension already sanctioned to the petitioner's father, Thiru.T.C.Ayyadurai, Tahsildar (Retired) from the date of his retirement on superannuation on 30.06.1987 till the date of his death on 11.01.2015 with pensionary benefits.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that when the petitioner's father Mr.T.C.Ayyadurai was working as a Tahsildar in respondent's office, he was served with a charge memorandum dated 23.09.1995, in which a final order was passed on 09.04.2021 with a penalty of cut in pension of Rs.300/- per month for a period of three years and ultimately, the petitioner's father was allowed to retire from service on 13.10.2010.

2/5

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that on 11.01.2015, the petitioner father died due to old age, due to which, the criminal case registered against his father became abated. As a consequence, the pension and other benefits of the petitioner's late father has to be regularized by the respondent. In this connection, the petitioner has sent a representation dated 05.04.2024 and the same was not considered by the respondent, as on date. Hence, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

4. At this juncture, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent submit that they would consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.04.2024 within a reasonable time.

5. Heard the learned counsel for both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. In view of the above submission of the learned Special Government Pleader, without going into the merits of the writ petition, 3/5

this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.04.2024 and pass order, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order on its own merits and in accordance with law.

7. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the above observations. No costs.

10.06.2025 Speaking/Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No vm To The District Collector, Salem.

4/5

C.KUMARAPPAN,J.

vm 10.06.2025 5/5