Skip to content


Dr. Kudavayil Balasubramanian Vs. The Principal Secretary to Government, Chennai and Others - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai Madurai High Court
Decided On
Case NumberW.P(MD) No. 18175 of 2016
Judge
AppellantDr. Kudavayil Balasubramanian
RespondentThe Principal Secretary to Government, Chennai and Others
Excerpt:
.....representation dated 5.01.2016. 2. heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned additional government pleader appearing for the respondents. 3. the case of the petitioner is that he worked as publication manager in the office of the 3rd respondent and retired from service on 30.06.2006; after his retirement, though pension has been granted, no dearness allowance (d.a.) has been given from the date of retirement; the 2nd respondent sent a proposal to the 1st respondent regarding d.a. and family pension; that the petitioner requested the respondents 1 and 2 by way of written representation dated 05.01.2016 by registered post for the grant of d.a. as per rule 6 of the tamil nadu pension rules and since the said representation evoked no response, the petitioner is.....
Judgment:

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to dispose the petitioner's representation dated 5.1.2016 within a time frame as fixed by this Honble Court.)

1. This petition has been filed, seeking to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to dispose the petitioner's representation dated 5.01.2016.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

3. The case of the petitioner is that he worked as Publication Manager in the office of the 3rd respondent and retired from service on 30.06.2006; after his retirement, though pension has been granted, no Dearness Allowance (D.A.) has been given from the date of retirement; the 2nd respondent sent a proposal to the 1st respondent regarding D.A. and Family Pension; that the petitioner requested the respondents 1 and 2 by way of written representation dated 05.01.2016 by registered post for the grant of D.A. as per Rule 6 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules and since the said representation evoked no response, the petitioner is before this Court.

4. Learned Additional Government Pleader has submitted that the 1st respondent is the competent authority to consider the claim of the petitioner, who will consider the representation of the petitioner and will pass suitable orders thereon.

5. Under such circumstances, the 1st respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 05.01.2016 and to pass appropriate orders on the same on merits and in accordance with law in the light of the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules.

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


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //