Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

T. Thangavel vs The Director Of Local Fund Audit on 24 February, 2010

Author: R. Sudhakar

Bench: R. Sudhakar

       

  

  

 
 
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 24.02.2010

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. SUDHAKAR

Writ Petition No.2102 of 2007



T. Thangavel							   .. Petitioner 

vs


The Director of Local Fund Audit,
 4th Floor,
Kuralagam,
Chennai.108.		   					.. Respondent

 

Prayer: Writ petition came to be re-numbered by transfer of O.A.No.7449 of 1999 on the file of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal,  praying to direct the respondent herein to treat the period from 15.9.1997, the date of relief based on the impugned transfer orders set aside by the Tribunal in O.A.No.7846/97 and R.A.No. 159/97 to 15.9.1998, the date on which the petitioner was served with the modified reposting orders, in which the petitioner was forced to be absent and away from duty as duty period with all benefits entitled. 
  
		For Petitioner	: Mr.K. Thennan
						 for
					  Mkr. Rajamanickam

		For Respondents  : Mr.S. Sivashanmugam
                                           Govt.Advocate 
	
	
					O R D E R

This writ petition is filed to direct the respondent herein to treat the period from 15.9.1997, the date of relief based on the impugned transfer orders set aside by the Tribunal in O.A.No.7846/97 and R.A.No. 159/97 to 15.9.1998, the date on which the petitioner was served with the modified reposting orders, in which the petitioner was forced to be absent and away from duty as duty period with all benefits entitled.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly states that the petitioner has made a representation on 20.10.1998 to the competent authority to consider the period of absence as duty period, which according to the petitioner, is not on the fault of the petitioner and therefore, it should be treated as duty period. Such representation has not been considered and disposed of so far and prays for a direction to consider the same.

3. Considering the limited scope of the prayer sought for, the respondents are directed to consider the representation dated 20.10.1998 and further representation if any and dispose of the same within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

24.2.2010 ra Index: /No Internet: Yes/ To The Director of Local Fund Audit, 4th Floor, Kuralagam, Chennai.108.

R. SUDHAKAR,J., WP No. 2102/2007 Date: 24.2.2010