K. Raju vs The Director Of Rural Development
2022 Latest Caselaw 9922 Mad

                                                                                W.A.No.1136 of 2022



                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                       DATED: 13.06.2022

                                                              CORAM

                                         The Hon'ble Mr. Justice PARESH UPADHYAY
                                                             and
                                     The Hon'ble Mrs. Justice V. BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN

                                                   W.A.No.1136 of 2022

                     K. Raju                                                           .. Appellant

                                                               Vs


                     1.The Director of Rural Development
                       Panagal Building,
                       Saidapet, Chennai – 15.

                     2.The District Collector (Rural Development),
                       Vellore District at Vellore.                                .. Respondents


                                  Appeal preferred under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the

                     order dated 05.03.2020 made in W.P.No.15024 of 2013.


                                       For Appellant      :     Ms.T.Aananthi

                                       For Respondents :        Mrs.S.Mythreye Chandru
                                                                Special Government Pleader




                     Page 1 of 4


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                               W.A.No.1136 of 2022



                                                        JUDGMENT

(Made by PARESH UPADHYAY, J.)

1. Challenge in this appeal is made to the order dated

05.03.2020 recorded on W.P.No. 15024 of 2013. This appeal is by the

original writ petitioner.

2. Challenge in the writ petition was to the punishment order

passed by the respondent authorities of imposing punishment of

withholding of one increment with cumulative effect. The writ petition

was allowed by modifying the said punishment order as withholding of

one increment without cumulative effect.

3. The writ petitioner was aggrieved by it and had filed writ

appeal.

4. State was not in appeal.

5. Learned advocate for the appellant has stated that, after

the order of learned Single Judge, the retirement benefits are paid to

the writ petitioner / appellant and he does not have any further

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1136 of 2022

grievance. She therefore seeks permission to withdraw this appeal.

6. Permission as prayed for is granted.

7. This appeal is dismissed accordingly. No costs.

                                                                              (P.U., J)    (V.B.S., J)
                                                                                    13.06.2022
                     Index:No
                     ssm/13

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1136 of 2022

PARESH UPADHYAY, J.

and V. BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, J.

ssm

W.A.No.1136 of 2022

13.06.2022

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis