Madras High Court
Ramasamy vs The Secretary on 12 March, 2018
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 12.03.2018
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.(MD)No.1928 of 2011
and
M.P(MD).Nos.1 & 2 of 2011
Ramasamy ... Petitioner
-Vs-
1.The Secretary,
UGC, Bahadhushah Zafar Marg,
New Delhi-110 002.
2.The Register,
Madurai Kamaraj University,
Madurai-21.
3.The Director,
EMMRC,
Madurai Kamaraj University,
Madurai-21.
4.The Director,
Local Fund Audit,
Kuralagam 4th floor,
Opposite to Madras High Court,
Chennai-600 108.
5.K.R.Baskar,
Cameraman,
EMMRC,
Madurai Kamaraj University,
Madurai.
6.R.Karthikayeni,
Technical Assistant,
EMMRC,
Madurai Kamaraj University,
Madurai.
7.N.Ramkeerthi,
Cameraman,
EMMRC,
Madurai Kamaraj University,
Madurai.
8.S.Murali,
Assistant Engineer,
EMMRC,
Madurai Kamaraj University,
Madurai.
9.S.Ravikumar,
Producer,
EMMRC,
Madurai Kamaraj University,
Madurai.
10.R.Seshadrirajan,
Producer,
EMMRC,
Madurai Kamaraj University,
Madurai.
... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus,
for the entire records pertaining to the order issued by the
2ndrespondent 1.EMMRC/MKU/Upgradation/payfixation dt. 13.11.2009 & 17.12.2009
2. EMMRC/MKU/Uppgradation/payfixation dt.13.11.2009 & 17.12.2009
3.EMMRC/MKU/Upgradation/payfixation dt. 13.11.2009 & 17.12.2009 4.EMMRC/MKU/
Upgradation/ payfixation dt. 01.07.2009 & 13.11.20095.EMMRC/MKU/Upgradation/
payfixation dt.1.07.2009 &13.11.20096.EMMRC/MKU/Upgradation/payfixation dt.
01.07.2009 & 13.11.2009 quash the same and direct the 2nd respondent to
implement G.O.Ms.No.190 over the sl.No.1 to 6 individuals of EMMRC, MKU,
Madurai by fixing a time frame.
!For Petitioner : Mr.R.Ramasamy
^For R1 : Mr.B.Vijay Karthikeyan
For R3 : Mr.R.M.Makesh Kumaravel
For R4 : Mr.G.Muthu
Additional Government Pleader
For R5 & R7 : Mr.K.Sudalaiandi
For R6, R8 & R9 : Mr.Lajapathiroy
:ORDER
The order dated 13.11.2009 and 01.09.2009 issued by the second respondent is under challenge in this Writ Petition.
2.On a perusal of the order dated 13.11.2009, it is seen that it is in relation to the approval of pay fixation of the salary of the respondents and the salary up-gradation arrears. So also the orders impugned are in connection with the details of fixation of pay and approval granted by the competent authorities. The writ petitioner is an erstwhile employee at Madurai Kamarajar University. He was holding the post of Guest Lecturer. The writ petitioner was relieved from service in the year 2013 and now, he is a practicing advocate in High Court, Madurai Bench. When the question of locus standi is raised, then the writ petitioner is of an opinion that he was an employee at Madurai Kamarajar University and therefore he may be permitted to adjudicate the re-fixation orders issued in favour of the respondents 5 to
10.
3.The learned counsel for the respondents states that the writ petitioner is now practicing as an advocate and he was relieved from the post of Guest Lecturer in the year 2013 itself. Thus he is not having any locus standi to question the pay fixation issued in favour of the respondents 5 to
10.
4.This Court expressed an opinion that an aggrieved person can alone challenge the order of fixation of pay and grant of arrears and fixation of arrears, which was granted in favour of the respondents 5 to 10 is totally not connected with the services rendered by the writ petitioner as Guest Lecturer in Madurai Kamaraj University.
5.The writ petitioner further has stated that he has moved this Writ Petition by way of PIL. Fixation of pay in respect of the respondents 5 to 10 cannot be considered as PIL and the orders impugned are certainly in relation to the personal service details of the respondents 5 to 10 and it can never be described as PIL. When the Court expressed its opinion as the petitioner is not an aggrieved person, the writ petitioner has expressed his willingness to withdraw this Writ Petition.
6.In these circumstances, the request to withdraw the writ petition is granted and the writ petition stands dismissed a withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
To The Director, Local Fund Audit, Kuralagam 4th floor, Opposite to Madras High Court, Chennai-600 108.
.