Arumugam.A v. The Deputy Inspector General

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 06.02.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SHAMIM AHMED A.Arumugam ... Petitioner vs.

1.The Deputy Inspector General, Burcan of Naviks, Cheetah Camp, Mankhurd, Mumbai-400 088.

2.The Commanding Officer, Indian Coast Guard Station, Mandapam, Rameshwaram, Ramanathapuram District.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first respondent to consider the petitioner's service for pensionary benefits and disburse his General Provident Fund and other monitory benefits on the basis of the representation given by the petitioner, dated 08.07.2022. For Petitioner :Mr.G.Thiruvarutselvan For Respondents :Mr.Selvakrishnan for Mr.V.S.Karthick ***** 1/5

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed with the following prayer: "to direct the first respondent to consider the petitioner's service for pensionary benefits and disburse his General Provident Fund and other monitory benefits on the basis of the representation given by the petitioner, dated 08.07.2022."

3.Mr.G.Thiruvarutselvan, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as Sweeper in the respondent Department vide order, dated 10.06.1992 and later, was posted at Mandapam Coast Guard and subsequently, he was deputed to work in ship on 03.03.2005. He further submits that due to the illegal activity done by the petitioner along with two others, the petitioner was dismissed from service on 22.03.2006. Challenging the order of dismissal, the petitioner had approached this Court by way of filing a Writ Petition bearing W.P.(MD)No.45364 of 2006, which was dismissed by this Court, vide order, dated 18.02.2013. Thereafter, the petitioner made several representations to the respondents for pension and monetary benefits and the last representation was dated 08.09.2021, copy 2/5

of which was found place at Page No.21 of the paper book. In spite of more than four years passed, the respondents are sitting tight over the matter and had not passed any positive order in favour of the petitioner. Thus, he submits that the respondents may be directed to consider the claim of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

4.Mr.Selvakrishnan, learned Counsel, assisted by Mr.V.S.Karthik, learned Counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner may be directed to submit a fresh representation before the second respondent setting out his entire grievances and claim and this Court may please to fix a time limit to decide the same, as no useful purpose will be served in keeping the present Writ Petition pending before this Court. 5.After considering the arguments, as advanced by the learned Counsels for the parties and after perusal of the entire records and the pleadings made in the Writ Petition and after perusal of the representation, dated 08.07.2022 made by the petitioner before the second respondent and also the request made by the learned Standing 3/5

Counsel for the respondents, this Court deem it appropriate that the petitioner may file a fresh representation before the second respondent with his entire grievances and claim within a period of four weeks from today and if any such representation is made before the second respondent within the time stipulated by this Court, the second respondent is directed to decide the same by way of a reasoned and speaking order and also in accordance with law within a period of two months thereafter, and communicate the order to the petitioner through Registered Post with AD (RPAD) within a period of two weeks thereafter.

6.With the above directions, this Writ Petition is finally disposed of. No costs.

Index :Yes / No 06.02.2025 Internet :Yes / No NCC :Yes / No cmr/mm 4/5

SHAMIM AHMED, J.

cmr/mm 06.02.2025 5/5