K.Muthukumarasamy v. The Registrar General,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 11.08.2021 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU W.P.No.16771 of 2021 K.Muthukumarasamy

...Petitioner

Vs The Registrar General High Court of Madras Chennai-600104.

...Respondent

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to be of the impugned order of the respondent made in Official Memorandum No.R.O.C.NO.55720/2020 B2 dated 22.07.2021 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to pay all the service/pay/pension benefits to the petitioner as claimed in his representation dated 16.09.2020 within a time frame as may be fixed by this Honourable Court. For Petitioner :

Mr.M.Gnanasekar For Respondent :

Mr.Karthik Ranganathan

ORDER

(Made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) The petitioner suffered an order of compulsory retirement from service with effect from October 10, 2002. The consequences of such punishment being meted out in disciplinary proceedings are obvious.

2. After 17 years, the petitioner purported to address a representation to the Chief Justice of this court and received a terse reply thereto from the Registrar-General of this court which has been questioned herein. The only reason indicated in the Registrar-General's response was that the matter was considered and it was declined as it was too late.

3. Considering that the petitioner had been compulsorily https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

retired from service in the year 2002 and the petitioner's challenge to the order passed in the disciplinary proceedings ended with the rejection of the petitioner's plea by the Supreme Court in the year 2014, the prayer made in 2020 has to be regarded belated. At any rate, to the extent that the representation made in the year 2020 sought to undo an order that had attained finality, the same could not have been countenanced.

4. Since no prejudice has been occasioned to the petitioner by the impugned reply issued by the Registrar-General, there is no merit in W.P.No.16771 of 2021, which is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar sra To:

The Registrar General High Court of Madras Chennai-600104.

Copy To

1. The Section Officer, Legal Cell, High Court, Madras - 104.

2. The Section officer, "B" Section (B2) High Court Madras - 104 W.P.No.16771 of 2021 VBM(CO) RGA(16/08/2021) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/