R.Ravi v. The Managing Director
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :22.12.2020
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY W.P.(MD) No.18999 of 2020 R.Ravi
...Petitioner
Vs 1.The Managing Director, Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam Division IV), Limited, Pillai Thanneer Pandhal, Pudukkottai.
2.The General Manager, Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation, Pudukkottai Zone, Pudukkottai.
...Respondents
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to pay the salary to the petitioner on par with persons joined along with him, by considering representation dated 02.11.2020. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian For Respondents : P.Balasubramanian Standing Counsel
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed to direct the respondents to pay salary to the petitioner on par with the persons, who joined along with him, by considering the representation dated 02.11.2020. 2.By consent of both parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that with the relief sought for in the prayer, though the petitioner has made a representation, dated 02.11.2020 to the respondents, so far no action has been taken. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court seeking appropriate orders.
1/3
4.Due to the non-availability of the papers, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents is not in a position to give suitable reply for the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
5.Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.
6.Admittedly, if the employees, who are working in the respondent Corporation, submit any representations explaining their grievances before the respondents, it is the duty of the respondent Corporation to redress the grievance of the employees, who gave the representations, within a period of 30 days from the date of receiving such representations.
7.In the case on hand, the petitioner has given a representation, dated 02.11.2020 to the respondents requesting them to disburse the salary on par with the persons, who joined along with him. However, the respondents have not taken any steps to consider the petitioner's representation and to dispose of the same till date.
8.In these type of cases, due to the inaction on the part of the respondents in considering the representations of the employees concerned, even though this Court had already directed the authorities concerned to dispose of the representations submitted by the employees concerned within the stipulated time, the respondents have failed to redress the grievance of the employees within the reasonable time, due to which, the employees of the respondent Corporation are forced to file a writ petition before this Court with the same relief sought for in this writ petition. Therefore, this Court expects the respondents to avoid these type of delay in disposing the representations of the parties concerned, in future, failing which, the same will be viewed seriously. 9.
In the light of the above, the Writ Petition stands disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation, dated 02.11.2020 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
+1cc to Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian, Advocate SR.No.27126 +1cc to Mr.P.Balasubramanian, Advocate SR.No.26795 W.P.(MD) No.18999 of 2020 22.12.2020 VB (06.01.2021) 3P 3C 3/3