← Library
Madras High CourtWP/12374/2013disposed of

G.Radha,S/O.Govindasamy v. The Superintending Engineer,

2017-12-05Honourable Mr Justice S.M. Subramaniam2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 05.12.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE S.M. SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No.12374 of 2013 G.Radha

...Petitioner

Versus

The Superintending Engineer, Chennai Electricity Distribution (North) Tamil Nadu Electricity Board/TANGEDCO 144,Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

...Respondent

Prayer: The writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to return the original title deed dated 12.06.1987 pertaining to the petitioners house situated at Swami Reddy Kandigai,Gummudipoondi Taluk (Doc.No.1288/87 and other connected documents received at the time of sanctioning loan. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Elamurugan For Respondent : Mrs.R.Varalakshmi * * * * *

O R D E R

The grievances of the writ petitioner is that the original documents handed over to the respondents Board at the time borrowing of housing loans have not been returned to the writ petitioner.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner states that the writ petitioner was an employee of the board and retired from service. However, the original documents deposited with the respondent has not been returned even after settling the loans, dues.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent states that the grievances of the writ petitioner is unable to be considered, on account of the pendency of the writ petition and if the writ petition is disposed of then they will be able to consider the claim of the writ petitioner and redress the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

grievances as early as possible. However, the learned counsel for the writ petitioner states the other Writ Petition filed in W.P.No.36459 of 2004 is challenging the order of punishment imposed on the writ petitioner.

4. This Court is of the opinion that the punishments are imposed based on the Disciplinary Proceedings initiated against the employees. However, the punishment imposed is unconnected with the release of the original title deed documents deposited by the writ petitioner with the respondent board.In other words returning of the documents are unconnected with the actions initiated under the Discipline and Appeal Rules.

5. In this view of the matter, the respondent is directed to consider the representation submitted by the writ petitioner on 06.06.2011 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petitioner is directed to enclose the copy of the representation and all other connected records along with the order passed in this writ petition.

6. Accordingly the Writ Petition stands disposed of. However, there is no order as to costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar kyl To The Superintending Engineer, Chennai Electricity Distribution (North) Tamil Nadu Electricity Board/TANGEDCO 144,Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

+1cc to M/S.R.VARALAKSHMI Advocate, S.R.No. 86548 +1cc to Mr.S.ELAMURUGAN, Advocate, S.R.No. 86140 W.P.No.12374 of 2014 KAN(CO) TR(26/12/2017) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/