M.Nagarajan v. The Registrar

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 16.07.2018 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR W.P(MD)No.15270 of 2018 M.Nagarajan ... Petitioner Vs.

The Registrar, Madurai Kamarajar University, Madurai.

... Respondents Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to promote the petitioner as Superintendent by fixing the seniority from the date on which his juniors were given promotion with all attendant benefits by considering the petitioner's representation dated 12.10.2017.

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Panneer Selvam For Respondent : Mr.T.Cibi Chakaravarthy

O R D E R

The prayer sought for in this writ petition is for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to promote the petitioner as Superintendent by fixing the seniority from the date on which his juniors were given promotion with all attendant benefits by considering the petitioner's representation dated 12.10.2017. 2.Heard Mr.V.Panneer Selvam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.T.Cibi Chakaravatrhy, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was appointed as Clerk and his appointment was regularised from the date of appointment i.e. on 10.04.2007. All these years, the petitioner has been working in that post and his next promotion is Assistant, from where, he has to be promoted as Superintendent, for which, even though, the petitioner is eligible, he has not been considered so far. He would further submit that, those who got appointed and regularised in the post of Clerks in the year 2008 had been given promotion as Superintendent as early as in the year 2013. However, the petitioner's case has not been https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

considered without any reason. Therefore, in this regard, the petitioner has given a representation on 12.10.2017 and if the said representation is directed to be considered by the respondent University and an order to that effect is directed to be passed, within a time frame, the petitioner would be satisfied. 4.I have heard the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent, who would submit that the said request of the petitioner dated 12.10.2017 would be considered on merits and in accordance with law and an order to that effect would be passed, within a time frame.

5.Considering the limited scope of the writ petition, this Court is inclined to pass the following order: "The respondent University is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 12.10.2017 with regard to his grievance of promotion to the post of Superintendent and decide the same on merits and in accordance with law and pass orders thereon, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order."

6.With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Sd ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ( CS I ) TRUE COPY SUB ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ( CS II ) Arul 1CC TO MR V PANEER SELVAM, ADVOCATE SR 73285 1CC TO M/S. ISAAC CHAMBERS ADVOCATES SR 73381 NM RSK SAR 2 23 10 2018 2P 3C W.P(MD)No.15270 of 2018 16.07.2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/