M. Dhanaraj Vs. The Superintending Engineer, Trichy Electricity Distribution Circle (Metro) and Another

M. Dhanaraj vs The Superintending Engineer, Trichy Electricity Distribution Circle (Metro) and Another

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Feb 22, 2016

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1178896

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1178896
Court: Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge: The Honourble Mr. Justice B. Rajendran
Decided On: Feb 22, 2016
Case Number: W.P(MD). No. 3626 of 2016 & WMP(MD). No. 3250 of 2016
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

M. Dhanaraj

Respondent

The Superintending Engineer, Trichy Electricity Distribution Circle (Metro) and Another

Excerpt

.....preferred an appeal. in the very same case, another accused earlier filed a writ petition in w.p.(md).no.1809 of 2011, by which, this court directed the respondent to reinstate the petitioner therein with all service and monitary benefits. pursuant to the said order, the 1st respondent revoked the suspension order and reinstated the petitioner therein. 5. now, it is brought to the notice of this court that the petitioner is going to retire on 28.02.2016. in this regard, he has also made a representation dated 11.02.2016 to the respondent. even that has not been considered. 6. the learned standing counsel for the respondents submitted that the case of the petitioner would be considered in the light of the order of this court passed in w.p.(md).no.1809 of 2011,dated 05.02.2014. 7. taking into consideration of the earlier order passed by this court in w.p.(md).no.1809 of 2011, dated 05.02.2014 and also the fact that the petitioner is going to retire on 28.02.2016, the first respondent is directed to consider the case of the petitioner, in accordance with the order of this court in w.p.(md).no.1809 of 2011, dated 05.02.2014 and pass appropriate orders on or before 26.02.2016 in accordance with law. accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. no costs.

Full Judgment

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records on the file of the 2nd respondent pertaining to its order bearing Memo No.EE/OandM/U/Try/Adm/A1/F Suspension/D.39/2011dated 29.01.2011 and to quash the same and consequently direct respondent to reinstate the petitioner in the service by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 11.02.2016.)

1. The prayer in the Writ Petition is for issuance of Writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records on the file of the 2^nd respondent pertaining to its order bearing Memo No.EE/O and M/U/Try/Adm/A1/F Suspension/D.39/2011 dated 29.01.2011 and to quash the same and consequently direct respondent to reinstate the petitioner in the service by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 11.02.2016.

2. Mr.A.U.Ramanathan, learned Standing Counsel takes notice on behalf of the respondents.

3. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

4. The only grievance of the petitioner is that he had been placed under suspension in the year 2011 and in that regard, a criminal case had been pending enquiry. Subsequently, he has been acquitted of the offence. Thereafter, the respondent has preferred an appeal. In the very same case, another accused earlier filed a writ petition in W.P.(MD).No.1809 of 2011, by which, this court directed the respondent to reinstate the petitioner therein with all service and monitary benefits. Pursuant to the said order, the 1st respondent revoked the suspension order and reinstated the petitioner therein.

5. Now, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner is going to retire on 28.02.2016. In this regard, he has also made a representation dated 11.02.2016 to the respondent. Even that has not been considered.

6. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submitted that the case of the petitioner would be considered in the light of the order of this court passed in W.P.(MD).No.1809 of 2011,dated 05.02.2014.

7. Taking into consideration of the earlier order passed by this court in W.P.(MD).No.1809 of 2011, dated 05.02.2014 and also the fact that the petitioner is going to retire on 28.02.2016, the first respondent is directed to consider the case of the petitioner, in accordance with the order of this court in W.P.(MD).No.1809 of 2011, dated 05.02.2014 and pass appropriate orders on or before 26.02.2016 in accordance with law. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.

Same Court & Year Chennai Madurai · 2016 Same Parties M. Dhanaraj vs The Superintending Engineer, Trichy Electricit... Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge The Honourble Mr. Justice B. Rajendran