Madras High CourtWP(MD)/4395/2022disposed of

Murugesan.K v. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation

2022-03-25Honourable Mr Justice S.M. Subramaniam2 pages

W.P(MD)No.4395 of 2022 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.03.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P(MD)No.4395 of 2022 and W.M.P(MD)No.3704 of 2022 K.Murugesan :Petitioner .vs.

1.Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Rep by its Principle Secretary, Fort St. George, Chennai-09.

2.Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, (Kumbakonam) Limited, Rep by its Managing Director, Kumbakonam Region, 27, Railway Station New Road, Kumbakonam-612 001, Tanjavur District.

3.Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Limted, Rep by its General Manager, Kumbakonam Region, 27, Railway Station New Road, Kumbakonam-612 001, Tanjavur District.

4.Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Limited, Rep by its Assistant Manager, (Employees & Administration) 27, Railway Station New Road, Kumbakonam-612 001, Tanjavur District.

: Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records relating to the impugned letter issued by the 4th respondent in Ka.No.591/Neer-8/TaNaAPoKa (Ku)/2021 dated 06.11.2021 and quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents to disburse the Monitory benefits such as https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

W.P(MD)No.4395 of 2022 Gratuity, provident fund, leave salary, bonus and all other benefits which the petitioner is entitled within a stipulated time as that may be fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner :Mr.A.Geroge Stephen Kanikkairaj For R1 :Mr.N.Santhosh Kumar Additional Government Pleader For R2 to R4 :Mr.P.Balasubramaniam

O R D E R

The learned counsel for the petitioner made a submission that the petitioner has already divorced his wife and based on the decree of divorce, he seeks removal of the name of his wife from the Service Record as nominee.

2.However, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent made a submission that no such decree of divorce has been produced by the petitioner.

3.Therefore, the said statement, in this regard, is insufficient to consider the claim of the writ petitioner. However, it is left open to the petitioner to produce all the relevant documents to the authority for consideration and only if the petitioner can able to prove that he is the legally wedded husband, who had already divorced his wife.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-II) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) Ns To 1.The Principle Secretary, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Fort St. George, Chennai-09.

+1 CC to M/s.P.BALASUBRAMANIAN, Advocate ( SR-14947[F] dated 28/03/2022 ) W.P(MD)No.4395 of 2022 and W.M.P(MD)No.3704 of 2022 25.03.2022 RK(04/04/2022) 2P 3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2