M.Ramadoss vs The Managing Director on 24 April, 2018

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

M.Ramadoss vs The Managing Director on 24 April, 2018

Bench: R.Suresh Kumar

        

 

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT               

DATED: 24.04.2018  

CORAM   


THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR              

W.P(MD)Nos.9089 of 2018   

M.Ramadoss                                                      ... Petitioner
Vs.

1.The Managing Director,
   Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
   (Kumbakonam) Ltd., 
   Railway Station Road,
   Kumbakonam,  
   Thanjavur District.

2.The Manager, 
   Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
   (Kumbakonam) Ltd., 
   Trichy Region, Periyamilaguparai,
   Trichy ? 620 001.

3.The Branch Manager,  
   Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
   (Kumbakonam) Ltd., 
   Thuvarankurichi Branch,
   Thuvarankurichi,
   Trichy District.                                             ... Respondents
Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to grant
permanent status confirmation order and arrears of salary from November 2016
to the petitioner as per 12(3) settlement of Industrial Disputes Act, 1946 on
the basis of representation/explanation of the petitioner dated 07.02.2018
and 12.03.2018 respectively.

!For Petitioner : Mr.P.Kalaiyarasi Bharathi
^For Respondents        : Mr.D.Sivaraman 
:ORDER

The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to grant permanent status confirmation order and arrears of salary from November 2016 to the petitioner as per 12(3) settlement of Industrial Disputes Act, 1946 on the basis of representation/explanation of the petitioner dated 07.02.2018 and 12.03.2018 respectively.

2.Heard Mrs.P.Kalaiyarasi Bharathi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.D.Sivaraman, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that with regard to his service grievance, the petitioner had given representations on 07.02.2018 and 12.03.2018 to the first respondent and if a direction is given to the first respondent to consider the said representations and an order to that effect on merits is directed to be passed within a time frame, the petitioner would be satisfied.

4.I have heard the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents in this regard, who would submit that the said representations would be considered by the first respondent on merits and in accordance with law and an order to that effect would be passed thereon.

5.Considering the said submissions made by both sides, this writ petition is disposed of with the following direction:

?The first respondent is directed to consider the representations of the petitioners dated 07.02.2018 and 12.03.2018 with regard to his service grievances, on merits and in accordance with law and pass orders thereon, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.?

6.With this direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madras High Court