The Secretary To Government v. K. Singaravel

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10.07.2019 CORUM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN and THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA Writ Appeal No.1591 of 2017 and CMP No.20870 of 2017

1. The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu Home (Courts VI) Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.

2. The Director of Prosecution, Slum Clearance Board Complex, 2nd Floor, Kamarajar Salai, Chennai - 600 005.

.... Appellants Vs K.Singaravel .... Respondents APPEAL filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 13.11.2013 made in W.P.No.30581 of 2013. WP.NO.30581/2013:

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuace of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Director of Prosecution for the year 2010-11 and promote him notionally and grant him all consequential service and monetary benefits.

For Appellants : Mrs.A.Sri Jayanthi, Spl.G.P. For Respondent : Mr.K.Venkatramani, Sr.C.

M/s.M.Muthappan

J U D G M E N T

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by K.K.SASIDHARAN, J.,) The learned single Judge entertained the Writ Petition filed by the respondent and a mandamus was issued directing the appellants herein to consider the representation for notional

promotion in the year 2010-11 and grant him all consequential benefits including monetary benefits. The said order is under challenge at the instance of the State.

2. We have heard the learned Special Government Pleader on behalf of the appellants. We have also heard the learned Senior Counsel on behalf of the respondent.

3. The respondent filed a Writ Petition for a mandamus directing the appellants to consider the representation for promotion to the post of Deputy Director of Prosecution for the year 2010-11. The request was to promote him notionally taking into account his retirement.

4. The order passed by the learned single Judge does not contain any indication that the merits of the matter was considered before issuing the mandamus. The learned single Judge directed the appellants to consider the representation. There was a consequential direction to pay the benefits to the respondent. The said direction has been taken as a positive one by the appellants and the same resulted in filing this intra Court appeal.

5. After hearing the learned Special Government Pleader on behalf of the appellants and the learned Senior Counsel for the respondent, we are of the view that interest of justice would be sub-served by clarifying the order passed by the learned single Judge.

6. In modification of the order passed by the learned single Judge, we direct the appellants to consider and dispose of the representation submitted by the respondent on merits and as per law. The question of granting the monetary benefits would depend upon the ultimate orders to be passed by the appellants in the representation submitted by the respondent. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.

7. The intra Court appeal is partly allowed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar TO:

1. The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu Home (Courts VI) Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.

2. The Director of Prosecution, Slum Clearance Board Complex, 2nd Floor, Kamarajar Salai, Chennai - 600 005.

+1cc to Government Pleader sr.58576 Writ Appeal No.1591 of 2017 and CMP No.20870 of 2017 ss(co) nr 28/08/2019