A. Ravichandran Vs. The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By its Principal Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai and Others

A. Ravichandran vs The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By its Principal Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Aug 23, 2016

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1188780

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/1188780
Court: Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge: T. Raja
Decided On: Aug 23, 2016
Case Number: Writ Petition(MD)No. 15060 of 2016
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

A. Ravichandran

Respondent

The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By its Principal Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai and Others

Excerpt

(prayer: petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india, for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 23.06.2016 within the time frame fixed by this court.) 1. the petitioner herein seeks for the issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing respondents 1 to 3 to pass orders on his representation, dated 23.06.2016, within the time-frame that may be fixed by this court. 2. mr.m.murugan, learned govt. advocate takes notice for the respondents. by consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 3. the petitioner was appointed as junior assistant on compassionate grounds on 02.05.2007 and his service was regularised vide g.o(3d)no.23, rural development and panchayat raj (p3) department, dated 31.07.2015 from the date of his initial appointment dated 04.05.2007. having completed bhavani sagar training on 08.10.2015, of course, with some delay in completing the said training due to administrative reasons, the petitioner appealed to the respondents to place him at appropriate place in the seniority list and to promote him as assistant with effect from the date of promotion of his juniors. consequently, by proceedings dated 11.12.2015, the 3rd respondent placed the petitioner in serial no.7 and seniority no.857-a. on the ground that he became eligible for promotion as assistant even on 01.03.2010, the petitioner gave a representation on 23.06.2016. since the said representation has not been considered so far, the petitioner has come before this court. 4.the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that it would suffice if the representation of the petitioner is directed to be disposed of by the respondents on merits and in accordance with law, within a time-frame to be fixed by this court. 5. in view of the limited scope of the prayer, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue involved, the respondents are directed to pass.....

Full Judgment

(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 23.06.2016 within the time frame fixed by this Court.)

1. The petitioner herein seeks for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing respondents 1 to 3 to pass orders on his representation, dated 23.06.2016, within the time-frame that may be fixed by this Court.

2. Mr.M.Murugan, learned Govt. Advocate takes notice for the respondents. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

3. The petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant on compassionate grounds on 02.05.2007 and his service was regularised vide G.O(3D)No.23, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (P3) Department, dated 31.07.2015 from the date of his initial appointment dated 04.05.2007. Having completed Bhavani Sagar Training on 08.10.2015, of course, with some delay in completing the said Training due to administrative reasons, the petitioner appealed to the respondents to place him at appropriate place in the Seniority List and to promote him as Assistant with effect from the date of promotion of his juniors. Consequently, by proceedings dated 11.12.2015, the 3^rd respondent placed the petitioner in serial No.7 and Seniority No.857-A. On the ground that he became eligible for promotion as Assistant even on 01.03.2010, the petitioner gave a representation on 23.06.2016. Since the said representation has not been considered so far, the petitioner has come before this Court.

4.The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that it would suffice if the representation of the petitioner is directed to be disposed of by the respondents on merits and in accordance with law, within a time-frame to be fixed by this Court.

5. In view of the limited scope of the prayer, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue involved, the respondents are directed to pass appropriate orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 23.06.2016 on merits and in accordance with law, after giving notice to the interested parties, if any, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

Same Court & Year Chennai Madurai · 2016 Same Parties A. Ravichandran vs The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By its ... Same Subject Education Same Judge T. Raja