A. Manikandan v. The Commissioner
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14.10.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA A.Manikandan
...Petitioner
Vs.
The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, General Department, Chennai.
...Respondent
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 04.08.2025 and to direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential monetary and other service benefits.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Palanivel For Respondent : Mrs.S.Mridula Royan for Ms.P.T.Ramadevi
ORDER
1/5
This writ petition has been filed seeking to direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 04.08.2025 and to consequently, reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential monetary and other service benefits.
2. Ms.P.T.Ramadevi, learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the respondent. In view of the consent expressed by the learned counsel on either side, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
3. The case of the petitioner is that, he joined the services of the respondent Corporation as a directly recruited Assistant Engineer through a sponsorship made by the Employment Exchange on 10.02.2014. When the petitioner was serving as an Assistant Engineer in Division-34, Zone-4, pursuant to the complaint given by one Narendra Babu, alleging that the petitioner demanded illegal gratification of Rs.10,000/-, a criminal case was registered against the petitioner in Crime No.25 of 2019 and he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 04.12.2019 and the petitioner was 2/5
subsequently placed under suspension, vide order dated 06.12.2019. Since the petitioner is under suspension for about six years and the said suspension has not been periodically reviewed, the petitioner made a representation before the respondent on 04.08.2025 seeking to revoke the suspension order passed against him. However, as the same evoked no response, the petitioner has come up with this writ petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, it would suffice, if this Court issues a direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 04.08.2025 and consequently, reinstate him into service with all consequential monetary and other service benefits.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that, appropriate orders will be passed on the petitioner's representation dated 04.08.2025 within the time stipulated by this Court.
6. In view of the above, this Court, without going into the merits of 3/5
the case, directs the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 04.08.2025 in the light of G.O.Ms.No.81 Human Resources Management (N) Department dated 04.08.2022 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
7. With the above directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.
14.10.2025 skt Index : Yes/No Speaking order : Yes/No NCC : Yes/No To:
The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, General Department, Chennai.
4/5
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
skt 14.10.2025 5/5