B.Sathish Kumar, Age 36 v. The District Manager

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 12.09.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH Writ Petition No.31483 of 2016 B.Sathish Kumar ... Petitioner vs.

1.The District Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited (TASMAC), Kancheepuram South District, Kancheepuram District, Pin: 631 503.

2.The Enquiry Officer, (Assistant Registrar / Retired), Office of the District Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited (TASMAC), South District, Orikkai, Kancheepuram.

... 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 pay subsistence allowance to the petitioner from the date on which he was placed under suspension orally and consequently, direct the second respondent to conclude the departmental proceedings initiated against the petitioner within a stipulated time limit.

For Petitioner :

Mr.V.Rajinikanth For Respondents :

Mr.B.Nedunchezian.

ORDER

By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

2. The petitioner has come up with the present writ petition for a mandamus, directing the first respondent to pay subsistence allowance to him from the date on which he was placed under suspension orally and consequently, to direct the second respondent to conclude the departmental proceedings initiated against him within a stipulated time limit. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3. Though very many contentions have been raised in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the only ground of the petitioner is that pending enquiry proceedings, he was not paid the subsistence allowance.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the respondents undertake to complete the departmental proceedings pending against the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. In view of the said submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents, I am of the opinion, there is no need for this Court to give a specific direction in this matter.

6. Hence, recording the said submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents that the respondents undertake to complete the departmental proceedings pending against the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the writ petition is closed. No costs.

Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CS V ) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar +1 cc to Mr.V.Rajinikanth,advocate,sr.51588 +1 cc to M/s.B.Nedunchezhiyan,advocate,sr.51991. mpi(co) krd 20/9 W.P.No.31483 of 2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/