K.P.P.Panneerchelvan v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

W.M.P.No.29824 of 2016 in W.P.No.30372 of 2015 R.SUBBIAH,J.

Originally, the writ petition was filed challenging the notice dated 13.06.2014 issued by the 2nd respondent/Enquiry Officer. Since, there was no interim order, the Enquiry Officer proceeded with the enquiry.

2. As the original impugned order dated 13.05.2014 is passed by the 4th respondent, the writ petitioner has come up with this petition seeking amendment of the prayer, i.e. "to call for the records on the file of the 4th respondent relating to the impugned order in Rc.No.45555/2014 SIS-2(1), dated 13.05.2014 and quash the same and consequent inquiry report and all further or other actions thereto and direct the 1st respondent to pay all retirement benefits to the petitioner. "

3.

In view of the above and as the learned counsel for the other side has not expressed any objection in allowing this petition, this petition seeking to amend the prayer in the Writ Petition, is allowed.

aeb 04.11.2016 (1⁄4) http://www.judis.nic.in