Home   |   About us   |   Contact us   |   Request Callback  
 
   
ALREADY A MEMBER ?
Username
Password

Translate

This Page To:

 
R.S. MOHAN V/S THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF SURVEY & LAND RECORDS SIVAGANGAI SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT & ANOTHER, decided on Thursday, July 23, 2009.
[ In the Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, W.P.(MD).No.1442 of 2009 & M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2009. ] 23/07/2009
Judge(s) : M. SATHYANARAYANAN
Advocate(s) : K. Vellaiswamy. R. Raja Rajan Government .
Judgment Full Text : Existing LawyerServices Members, kindly login above.

Non Members, Enter your email address:- and , to request this judgment.

Alternatively, you may send a request by email to info@lawyerservices.in for the Full Text of this Judgment (chargeable).

LawyerServices Facebook Page






#LawyerServices #bestlegalsoftware #legalsoftware #judgment #caselaw









    Constitution of India - Article 226 ? Service - Petitioner was placed under suspension by the first respondent ? Petitioner contended that though prosecution was launched his name was not arrayed as an accused in the First Information Report - pursuant to the order of suspension no further action has been taken and he has not been issued with any charge memo and suspension is a prolonged one. Court held - petitioner is at liberty to submit representation to the first respondent for revocation of order of suspension within a period of one week and the first respondent on receipt of such representation from the petitioner is directed to consider the same and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of four weeks thereafter after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner - Writ Petition is disposed of.     (PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the first respondent dated 08.07.2008 issued in his proceedings R.C.A2/4956/2008 and quash the same and direct the respondents to pay the salary and allowances for the period of impugned order of suspension treating the suspension period as on duty and granting such other and further relief).The petitioner while working as Sub-Inspector of Survey Karaikudi Mobile Karaikudi and he was placed under suspension on 08.07.2008 by the first respondent. Prosecution was also launched and according to the petitioner his name was not arrayed as an accused in the First Information Report.2. It is the case of the petitioner that in pursuant to the impugned order of suspension dated 08.07.2008 no further action has been taken and he has not been issued with any charge memo and that the suspension is a prolonged one.3. The Court heard the submissions of Mr. K. Vellaiswamy learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R.Raja Rajan learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.4. The petitioner is at liberty to submit a representation to the first respondent for revocation of order of suspension within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the first respondent on receipt of such representation from the petitioner is directed to consider the same and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of four weeks thereafter after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.5. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.