← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/16262/2018disposed of

S.Jeyakumar v. The General Manager

2018-07-25Honourable Mr Justice R. Suresh Kumar2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.07.2018 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR W.P.(MD) No.16262 of 2018 S.Jeyakumar ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Karur Region, Karur, Karur District.

2.The Branch Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Musiri Branch, Thiruchirapalli District.

3.The Branch Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Manaparai Branch, Tiruchirapalli District.

... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 herein to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of service w.e.f 02.06.2018 instead of 16.06.2018 and confer all monetary benefits to the petitioner w.e.f. 02.06.2018. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Bharathy Kannan For Respondents : Mr.D.Sivaraman Standing Counsel

ORDER

The prayer sought for in this writ petition is for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 herein to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of service w.e.f 02.06.2018 instead of 16.06.2018 and confer all monetary benefits to the petitioner w.e.f. 02.06.2018.

2.Heard Mr.S.Bharathy Kannan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.D.Sivaraman, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would

submit that the petitioner has been working as Driver at the respondents Corporation. While so, he was placed under suspension from 02.06.2018 to 16.06.2018, as the said suspension dated 02.06.2018 was revoked on 16.06.2018 and he was reinstated. In order to regularise the service of two weeks period i.e., from 02.06.2018 to 16.06.2018, the petitioner had given a representation on 03.07.2018 and if the said representation is directed to be considered by the respondents on merits and an order to that effect is directed to be passed within a time frame, the petitioner would be satisfied.

4.I have heard Mr.D.Sivaraman, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents, who would submit that the said request is a premature one and after disciplinary proceedings, ultimately, a decision would be taken by the respondents with regard to the suspension period.

5.Be that as it may, by taking into account the innocuous nature of the prayer sought for herein, this writ petition is disposed of with the following direction:- "that the respondents are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 03.07.2018 with regard to the grievance of the petitioner to regularise the service of the suspension period from 02.06.2018 to 16.06.2018 and pass orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order."

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

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-II) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-I) +1CC to Mr.S.Bharathy Kannan Advocate in SR.No.74926. +1CC to Mr.D.Sivaraman Advocate in SR.No.74861. RMI DS/RP/SAR-1 :06.08.2018: 2P/3C W.P.(MD) No.16262 of 2018 25.07.2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/