M.Ganapathy v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 20.10.2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE 1.M.Ganapathy, 2.N.Sampathu, 3.P.Ramamoorthy, 4.C.Panchanthan, 5.A.Ramakka, 6.P.Pencilamma, 7.B.Deepa, 8.A.Narasimman, 9.E.Kumutha, 10.M.Saravanan, 11.M.Balu, 12.A.Krishnan, 13.M.Vijayakumar, 14.K.Sharmila, 15.K.Dilli, 16.C.Gunasekaran, 17.C.Umavathi, 18.S.Rani, 19.P.Bharathy, 20.R.Vinalraj, 21.D.Radhakrishnan, 22.T.Stellabai, 23.P.Sasikala, 24.C.Nagarajan, 25.D.Veeramani, 26.M.Ilayaraja, ... Petitioners
Versus
1.The State of Tamil Nadu rep.by The Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
1/4
2.The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai - 600 006.
.... Respondents Prayer:-Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to issue a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioners representation dated 15.02.2022 to give monetary benefits to the petitioners from their initial appointment dated 23.11.2012 to 25.01.2018 with all consequential benefits and arrears.
For Petitioners : Ms.S.Esairani Narasimman For Respondents : Mr.S.Yashwanth Additional Government Pleader.
O RDER The grievance of the petitioners is that their monetary benefits were not paid from the date of their initial appointment, but were paid only from the date of their regularisation. They were appointed in the year 2012 as per G.O.Ms.No.47 dated 02.03.2012. They were regularised in service on 25.01.2018 pursuant to the order passed by this Court in WP No.17663 of 2014 dated 25.01.2018. The petitioners have given a representation on 15.02.2022, seeking for payment of their monetary benefits from the date of their initial appointment. Since the representation has not been considered, they have filed this writ petition.
2. Heard Ms.S.Esairani Narasimman, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.Yashwanth, learned Additional Government Pleader accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent of both the parties, the main 2/4
writ petition has been taken up for final disposal.
3. At the outset, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that the petitioners will have to give a fresh representation.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners, on instructions, would submit that the petitioners are willing to give a fresh representation. The same is recorded.
5. No prejudice would be caused to the respondents if the petitioners are permitted to give representation seeking for payment of monetary benefits to them from the date of their respective initial appointment and a direction is issued to the respondents to consider the same on merits and in accordance with law.
6. For the foregoing reasons, this Court directs the petitioners to give individual representation to the first respondent, seeking for payment of monetary benefits from the date of their initial appointment within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of the ABDUL QUDDHOSE,J., 3/4
sr said representation, the first respondent shall pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks thereafter. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
20.10.2022 2/2 sr Index: Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order To 1.The State of Tamil Nadu rep.by The Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai - 600 006.
20.10.2022 4/4