Madras High CourtWP(MD)/12106/2019disposed of

A. Saraswathi,D/O. Alagan, v. The Managing Director,

2019-05-15Honourable Mrs Justice J. Nisha Banu2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 15.05.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU W.P(MD)No.12106 of 2019 A. Saraswathi .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, (Kumbakonam) Limited, Railway Station Road, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District.

2.The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam), Limited, 1/51, Pillai Thanneer Panthal, Thirumayam Road, Pudukkottai.

3.The Branch Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam), Limited, Ponnamaravathi Branch, Ponnamaravathi, Pudukkotai District.

.. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents Corporation to permit the petitioner to work in the originally allotted place as Senior Grade Assistant in the 3rd respondent Branch on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 06.05.2019 within a time stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.P. Saravanakumar For Respondents : Mr. P. Balasubramanain

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents Corporation to permit the petitioner to work in the originally allotted place ie., in the 3rd respondent Branch as Senior Grade Assistant, on the basis of her representation dated 06.05.2019 within a stipulated time.

2. Mr. P.Balasubramanian, learned Standing Counsel takes notices for the respondents.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3. By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final hearing at the stage of admission itself.

4. The case of the petitioner is that while she was working as a Senior Grade Assistant in the 3rd respondent Branch, she was suspended for a period of two days i.e., on 25.03.2019 and 26.03.2019 and subsequently, reinstated in service on 27.03.2019, but, she was allowed to work in the Accounts Section, instead of originally allotted Section. In such circumstances, the petitioner has sent a representation, dated 06.05.2019, to the respondents requesting to allow her to work in the originally allotted place and the same has not been considered so far. Hence, this Writ Petition is filed.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit the petitioner is a physically challenged person. He would further submit that it would be suffice, if the representation of the petitioner dated 06.05.2019 is directed to be disposed of by the respondents as per law.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also having regard to the submission made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court, without going into the merits of the petitioner's claim, directs the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 06.05.2019, and pass appropriate orders on its own merit and in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

7. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (vo) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) +1 CC to M/s.P.KALAIYARASI BHARATHI, Advocate ( SR-66019[F] dated 16/05/2019 ) trp/vsd W.P(MD)No.12106 of 2019 15.05.2019 KM/(24.05.2019) 2P 2C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/