S.M.Abdul Kader, v. P.Ganesan,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Third day of June Two Thousand Sixteen PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice NOOTY. RAMAMOHANA RAO and The Hon`ble Mr.Justice S.S.SUNDAR CMP(MD) No.5514 of 2016 IN WA(MD) No.SR21353 of 2016 S.M.ABDUL KADER, ... 3rd PARTY/PETITIONER/APPELLANT Vs 1 P.GANESAN, ... RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PETITIONER 2 THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, CHENNAI-600 009.
3 THE DIRECTOR OF FAMILY WELFARE DMS COMPLEX, THENAMPET, CHENNAI-600 006.
4 THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, DMS COMPLEX, THENAMPET, CHENNAI-600 006.
5 THE DEAN, GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, THOOTHUKUDI 628 008, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT. ... RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to permit the 3rd Party / Petitioner / Appellant to Leave to file appeal challenging the order dated 13.04.2016 and made in W.P.(MD) No.7179 of 2016 and hear the appellant on merits and thus render justice.
Prayer in WP(MD). 7179/ 2016 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1st respondent i.e. the Principal secretary to Government, Health and Family Welfare Department, Chennai to pass appropriate orders on the petitioners appeal dated 18.07.2015 within a stipulated time.
ORDER : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S. M.MD.IBRAHIM ALI, Advocate for the petitioner the court made the following order:-
This Miscellaneous Petition has been moved by a third party seeking leave to prefer an appeal against the order passed by this Court in W.P(MD)No.7179 of 2016, which was instituted by the first respondent herein.
2. At the very outset, it is appropriate to notice that this Court by disposing of the writ petition on 13th April 2016, directed the appeal said to have been preferred by the writ petitioner on 18th July 2015 before the State Government to be disposed of within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the said order.
3. Mr.M.Mohammed Ibrahim Ali, learned Counsel for the petitioner herein/third party would contend that the said appeal preferred by the writ petitioner was directed against an order granting promotion to the petitioner herein and hence the petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by this court, inasmuch as the same is passed without hearing the petitioner in this Miscellaneous petition, since he is not impleaded as a party respondent in the said writ petition.
4. We are not at all impressed with this contention. By the order passed on 13th April 2016, this Court has not decided any rights of the parties, for one to feel aggrieved by any such order. A very innocuous and harmless order has been passed by this Court directing the State Government to deal with the appeal said to have been preferred to by the writ petitioner in case it is still pending. It goes without saying that the appellate authority, even if there is no specific provision under the service rules provided for challenging any promotion by way of preferring such an appeal, is bound to entertain any such appeal and examine the records for its sustainability and the State Government has inherent power to examine any order passed in original by any authority subordinate to it and to examine the same for its regularity.
Therefore, we are afraid that no rights of the petitioner herein are in any manner affected by the order passed by this Court. However, it goes without saying that the State Government would provide an opportunity to the petitioner herein to make his view point known to the State Government and then pass an appropriate order. If the petitioner herein submits any such representation in defence of his promotion, the same has to be taken into consideration by the State Government and fifteen days' time is granted to the petitioner to make any such representation in writing, if he so desires.
5. With these directions, this Civil Miscellaneous Petition is disposed of. Consequently, the appeal stands rejected. sd/- 03/06/2016 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023.
TO 1 THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, CHENNAI-600 009.
3 THE DIRECTOR OF FAMILY WELFARE DMS COMPLEX, THENAMPET, CHENNAI-600 006.
4 THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, DMS COMPLEX, THENAMPET, CHENNAI-600 006.
5 THE DEAN, GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, THOOTHUKUDI 628 008, THOOTHUKUDI DISTRICT.
+1cc to Mr.M.MD.Ibrahim Ali, Advocate SR.No.27636 sm:SKS-RR:SAR III:10.06.2016:3P/7C
ORDER
IN CMP(MD) No.5514 of 2016 IN WA(MD) No.SR21353 of 2016 Date :03/06/2016