R.Nachimuthu v. The Senior Regional Manager

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 27.08.2015

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.(MD)No.15475 of 2015 and M.P.(MD) No. 1 of 2015 R.Nachimuthu ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Senior Regional Manager, TASMAC, Tiruchirappalli, Tiruchirappali District.

2.The District Manager, TASMAC, Pudukottai, Pudukottai District.

.. Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent NO.1 to dispose of the appeal 25.04.2015 within the time stipulated by this Court and pass any further or other order as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

For Petitioner ...

Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy For Respondents ...

Mr.M.Munisamy

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed by R.Nachimuthu, who has been initially appointed as a salesman at Shop No.6744 at Kuruvikondanpatti, Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkottai District and now working at Shop No.6523 situated at Poonganagar, Pudukottai District seeking mandamus directing the respondent No.1 to dispose of the appeal 25.04.2015 within the time stipulated by this Court.

2. By consent, this Writ Petition is taken up for hearing at the stage of admission itself.

3.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for TASMAC, who takes notice for the respondents.

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the second respondent issued the charge memo dated 22.09.2014 leveling four charges against the petitioner and the second charge memo was issued on 07.11.2014 and after the petitioner gave explanation, the second respondent issued the order of dismissal.

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

5. He would further submit that as against the order of dismissal from service, the petitioner has preferred an appeal to the first respondent on 25.04.2015 and the same is pending. Adding further, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would further submit that the petitioner sought for a direction to the first respondent to dispose of the pending appeal so that he will be in a position to vindicate his innocence and get his employment back, as the petitioner is wholly relying upon the employment for his livelihood.

6. The learned standing counsel appearing for TASMAC sought for 12 weeks time to dispose of the appeal.

7. Considering the limited prayer made by the petitioner, without going into the merits of the case, the first respondent is directed to consider the appeal filed by the petitioner within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order

8. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Senior Regional Manager, TASMAC, Tiruchirappalli, Tiruchirappali District.

2.The District Manager, TASMAC, Pudukottai, Pudukottai District.

+1cc to Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy, Advocate SR.No.49898 W.P.(MD)No.15475 of 2015 27.08.2015 ses NS/AN-MP/14.09.2015 : 2P/4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/