← Library
Madras High CourtWP/52/2024disposed of with direction

M.Ravichandran v. M/S.State Express Transport Corporation

2025-12-01Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani8 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 01.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI M.Ravichandran ... Petitioner Vs.

1.M/s.State Express Transport Corporation, Rep.by its Managing Director, No.2, Pallavan Salai, Chennai-600 002.

2.M/s.State Express Transport Corporation, Rep.by its General Manager, No.2, Pallavan Salai, Chennai-600 002.

3.M/s.State Express Transport Corporation, Rep.by its Senior Deputy Manager,

(Human Resource Development), No.2, Pallavan Salai, Chennai-600 002. ....Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the third respondent in his proceedings in Order No.008926/DL5/AVIPOKA/2023 dated 31.07.2023 and quash the same and consequently, direct the third respondent herein to refund the recovery made in the salary of the petitioner to the petitioner herein. For Petitioner :

Mr.D.Soundar Raj For Respondents : Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal Standing Counsel

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the proceedings of the

third respondent in Order No.008926/DL5/AVIPOKA/2023 dated 31.07.2023 and for a consequential direction to the third respondent herein to refund the recovery made in the salary of the petitioner to the petitioner.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner joined as Driver in the respondent Corporation and he was kept under suspension on the ground that luggage fare was not collected for two bags weighing approximately 50 kg by the Conductor. Enquiry was conducted and the charges were proved and a show cause notice was issued on 11.03.2023 by the third respondent proposing the punishment of postponement of increments for a period of three years, for which, the petitioner sent reply on 18.03.2023. However, vide impugned order dated 31.07.2023, the third respondent has confirmed the punishment of postponement of increments for a period of three years with cumulative

effect, without considering the reply given by the petitioner. Challenging the same, the present writ petition has been filed.

3. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that it would suffice if this Court grants liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned Labour Court for raising the Industrial Dispute as against the punishment imposed by the third respondent.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.

5. Considering the limited request made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Court, without interfering with the

impugned order issued by the third respondent, grants liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned Labour Court for raising the Industrial Dispute.

6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

01.12.2025 NCC: Yes / No Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No ssb

To 1.M/s.State Express Transport Corporation, Rep.by its Managing Director, No.2, Pallavan Salai, Chennai-600 002.

2.M/s.State Express Transport Corporation, Rep.by its General Manager, No.2, Pallavan Salai, Chennai-600 002.

3.M/s.State Express Transport Corporation, Rep.by its Senior Deputy Manager, (Human Resource Development), No.2, Pallavan Salai, Chennai-600 002.

M.DHANDAPANI, J.

ssb

01.12.2025