G.Subramaniam, S/O.Govindan, v. The Managing Director,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 15.09.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH Writ Petition No.28906 of 2016 G.Subramaniam ... Petitioner vs.

1. The Managing Director, TASMAC, Thalamuthu Natarajan Maaligai, Egmore, Chennai-600 008.

2.The Senior Regional Manager, TASMAC, Salem, Salem District.

3. The District Manager, TASMAC, Dharmapuri, Dharmapuri District.

... Respondents Writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to dispose the revision petition filed by the petitioner on 24.04.2015 before the 1st respondent and the same has been forwarded by the second respondent to the first respondent in proceedings Na.Ka.No.382/2013/E, dated 07.09.2015, within a stipulated time.

For Petitioner :

Mr.C.Prakasam For Respondent :

Mr.C.Kasirajan TASMAC

O R D E R

The petitioner has come up with the present writ petition for a mandamus, directing the first respondent to dispose of the revision petition filed by the petitioner on 24.04.2015, before the first respondent and the same has been forwarded by the second respondent to the first respondent vide proceedings dated 07.09.2015.

2. It is the case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as a Supervisor in the TASMAC shop on 29.11.2003 and subsequently worked in various TASMAC shops in Dharmapuri District and finally when he was working in the Vellisandhai

TASMAC shop, the police arrested all the employees who are working in the said TASMAC shop for alleged irregularities that one of the employee mixed the water with liquor bottles and subsequently, he was suspended from service on 12.04.2012 and was terminated from service by the proceedings of the third respondent dated 31.08.2013. Aggrieved against which, the petitioner filed statutory appeal before the second respondent and the same was dismissed by the second respondent vide proceedings dated 18.12.2013. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Palacode, by an order dated 09.02.2015, in C.C.No.128/2012, has acquitted the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred a revision before the first respondent on 24.04.2015 against the order of dismissal passed by the third respondent.

The first respondent forwarded the same to the General Manager. But the general Manager forwarded the revision petition to the second respondent, who inturn forwarded the same to the first respondent vide proceedings dated 07.09.2015 stating that all the original files are lying with the first respondent office. But, the same was not considered so far. Hence, left with no other alternative, the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition for the relief set out earlier.

3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel, who has taken notice on behalf of the respondent.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the submissions made on either side, this Court directs the first respondent to dispose of the revision petition filed by the petitioner dated 24.04.2015, and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to the claim projected by the petitioner and it is for the first respondent to consider the claim of the petitioner strictly on merits and in accordance with law. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. -s/d- Assistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar arr

To

1. The Managing Director, TASMAC, Thalamuthu Natarajan Maaligai, Egmore, Chennai-600 008.

2.The Senior Regional Manager, TASMAC, Salem, Salem District.

3. The District Manager, TASMAC, Dharmapuri, Dharmapuri District.

+1 cc to Mr.C.Prakasam Advocate sr 52538 +1 cc to Mr.C.Kasirajan Advocate sr 52263 W.P.No.28906 of 2016 aa18/10/2016