Samuthirapandian v. The Managing Director

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 21.09.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN Writ Petition No.13183 of 2020 Samuthirapandian ...

Petitioner -Vs1 The Managing Director TAICO Bank, No.36, South Canal Bank Road Raja Annamalaipuram, Mandavelipakkam Chennai 600 028.

2. The Inspector of Police Vigilance and Anti Corruption Wing Coimbatore.

...

Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the promotion of the petitioner who is now employed as Sub Accountant based on his appointment order and the periodical promotions.

For Petitioner :Mrs.S.Sumathy

O R D E R

The matter was taken up through Web-hearing.

2. The writ petition has been filed seeking direction to the first respondent to consider promotion of the petitioner to the higher posts periodically. He is presently working as Accountant and according to him he was denied promotion for several years without any valid reason. In the affidavit, there is a reference to the vigilance proceedings initiated against him and also a criminal case initiated under Prevention of Corruption Act, in 2009. Nothing is stated in the affidavit as to what has happened to the criminal case and whether there was any disciplinary action pending against him.

Page numbers https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3. The averments in the affidavit are completely incoherent and cumulatively the same do not project any specific cause of action as to the basis of the petitioner's grievance. This Court is unable to comprehend as to what is the basis of the petitioner's claim and to what post he is aspiring to be promoted over a period of time. The prayer as it is framed is too generic in nature which can never be the basis for this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus.

4. On the whole, this Court is of the view that there is a complete lack of any cause of action and nothing is disclosed in the affidavit as such. The averments are also not connected to each other projecting any proper sequence of events and the date of the superannuation is mentioned as 30.06.2019 in Para 9 of the affidavit.

5. Therefore, this Court finds that the writ petition is completely bereft of any substance and merits. The same is therefore dismissed. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar KST To 1.The Managing Director TAICO Bank, No.36, South Canal Bank Road Raja Annamalaipuram, Mandavelipakkam Chennai 600 028.

2.The Inspector of Police Vigilance and Anti Corruption Wing Coimbatore.

W.P.No.13183 of 2020 SR(CO) CB(28/10/2020) Page numbers https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/