Skip to content


M. Habeeb Rahman Vs. The State Rep. by its, Additional Chief Secretary-cum-Commissioner for Revenue, Administration, Chennai and Others - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai Madurai High Court
Decided On
Case NumberW.P(MD)No. 17466 of 2016
Judge
AppellantM. Habeeb Rahman
RespondentThe State Rep. by its, Additional Chief Secretary-cum-Commissioner for Revenue, Administration, Chennai and Others
Excerpt:
.....constitution of india for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to sanction the gratuity and encashment of earn leave to the petitioner by considering the representation dated 18.01.2016 and reminder on 12.05.2016.) 1. this writ petition has been filed, seeking to direct the respondents to sanction the gratuity and encashment of earn leave to the petitioner by considering the representation dated 18.01.2016 and reminder dated 12.05.2016. 2. the case of the petitioner is that for the occurrence that had taken place in the year 1991, a criminal case was registered in the year 1997 and the department initiated disciplinary proceedings in the year 1993, which was subsequently dropped on 22.02.2007; that as on date, there is no charge pending against him and he is entitled.....
Judgment:

(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to sanction the gratuity and encashment of earn leave to the petitioner by considering the representation dated 18.01.2016 and reminder on 12.05.2016.)

1. This writ petition has been filed, seeking to direct the respondents to sanction the gratuity and encashment of Earn Leave to the petitioner by considering the representation dated 18.01.2016 and reminder dated 12.05.2016.

2. The case of the petitioner is that for the occurrence that had taken place in the year 1991, a criminal case was registered in the year 1997 and the department initiated disciplinary proceedings in the year 1993, which was subsequently dropped on 22.02.2007; that as on date, there is no charge pending against him and he is entitled to Provident Fund, Gratuity and encashment of Earn Leave; that except Provident Fund, other benefits were not sanctioned to him; that he made a representation dated 18.01.2016 followed by a reminder on 12.05.2016 for sanction of the benefits and since there was no response on the representation, the petitioner is before this Court.

3. In support of his submission, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment of this Court in the case of B.Udayakumari vs. The District Collector, Cuddalore [W.P.No.20946 of 2014] decided on 06.08.2014, wherein this Court directed the respondents therein to pay the benefits within eight weeks.

4. Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would contend that the respondent is ready and prepared to consider the representation dated 18.01.2016 of the petitioner and will pass suitable orders thereon within the time frame to be fixed by this Court.

5. Under such circumstances, the 2nd respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 18.01.2016, followed by the reminder dated 12.05.2016 in the light of the judgment of this Court (supra) and pass appropriate orders on the same 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.


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