Mrs.R.Uma, v. Union Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10.10.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM and W.M.P.Nos.35426 & 35428 of 2018 & W.M.P.No.13854 of 2019 W.P.No.30349 of 2018 Mrs.R.Uma ... Petitioner Vs.

1/6

5.Besant Arundale Senior Secondary School, Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai - 600 041.

... 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 3rd respondent's minutes of the 48th meeting dated 22.08.2016 and minutes of the 53rd meeting dated 11.10.2018 of the Governing Board of the Kalakshetra Foundation, Chennai and quash the same as petitioner concern and consequently direct the Kalakshetra Foundation to regularize the services of the petitioner with all benefits.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Venkatesulu For Respondents : Mr.K.Subbu Ranga Bharathi Central Government Standing Counsel for R1 Mr.M.Rajendiran Additional Government Pleader for R2 Mr.Karthikrajan for R3 to R6 2/6

W.P.No.33707 of 2018 Mrs.R.Uma Sekar ... Petitioner Vs.

Thiruvanmiyur, Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai - 600 041.

5.The Principal, Besant Arundale Senior Secondary School (BASS), Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai - 600 041.

... Respondents 3/6

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 pertaining to the impugned order of termination in F.No.A-48-57/2018-KF dated 20.11.2018 issued by the 4th respondent/Director, Kalakshetra Foundation and quash the same and further direct the 4th respondent to reinstate the petitioner forthwith in service with all attendant benefits including continuity of service and arrears of salary and allowances. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Venkatesulu For Respondents : Dr.G.Babu Central Government Standing Counsel for R1 Mr.M.Rajendiran Additional Government Pleader for R2 Mr.Karthikrajan for R3 to R6 COMMON ORDER The learned counsel for the petitioner made a submission that the petitioner died during the pendency of the writ petitions.

The husband of the writ petitioner is the legal heir and therefore, the respondents have to settle the eligible benefits in favour of the husband of the deceased petitioner. It is made clear that the eligible benefits are to be settled as expeditiously as possible, if not already settled.

4/6

With this observation, these writ petitions stand dismissed. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 10.10.2022 Index:Yes Internet:Yes Speaking order ssr To 5/6

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

ssr and W.M.P.Nos.35426 & 35428 of 2018 & W.M.P.No.13854 of 2019 10.10.2022 6/6