Madras High CourtWP(MD)/14941/2026dismissed for nonprosecution

N.Swaminathan v. The Secretary

2026-06-08Honourable Mr.Justice Mummineni Sudheer Kumar5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 08/06/2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR and WMP(MD)Nos.11243 and 11244 of 2026 N.Swaminathan ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Secretary, Department of Food and Public Distribution, Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi..

2. The Managing Director, Central Warehousing Corporation, New Delhi.

3. The Director (Personnel), Central Warehousing Corporation, New Delhi.

4. The Regional Manager, Central Warehousing Corporation, Regional Office, Chennai..

5. The Area Manager,, Food Corporation of India, Thanajvur.

... Respondents 1/5

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 records relating to the original order passed by the 3rd respondent in No. CWC- CD/JX-CWKumbakonam (Invest.)/2017-18 dated 06.09.2017 and consequent memorandum No.TQC/L and G/Kumbakonam/2017 -18/1078 dated 13.09.2017 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to refund the amounts recovered from the petitioner's retirement benefits together with 18 percent p.a interest. For Petitioner : Mr.Sethuram Sankara Thevar For R1 : Mr.G.Ramanathan CGSC

ORDER

This matter came up for consideration on 05.06.2026. As there was no representation for the petitioner, the same was directed to be listed under the caption ''for dismissal''. Accordingly, the matter is listed under the caption ''for dismissal'' today.

2. This is a writ petition, where a minor penalty of reduction of pay by one stage in the time scale of pay of the Superintendent for a period of one year without cumulative effect, was imposed on the petitioner through proceeding dated 06.09.2017 and the same was communicated to the petitioner through memorandum dated 13.09.2017. Challenging the 2/5

said punishment that was imposed as early as on 06.09.2017, the present writ petition has been filed after the lapse of about nine years. Therefore, this Court was not inclined even to order notice in the matter.

3. However, there was no representation for the learned counsel for the petitioner either on 05.06.2026 or today i.e on 08.06.2026, in spite of the matter being listed under the caption for dismissal.

4. In the circumstances, this Court is left with no other option except to dismiss the petition for non-prosecution. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed for non production. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 08.06.2026 CM 3/5