Madras High Court
N. Somasundaram vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 6 July, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06.07.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
W.P.No.299 of 2016
and
W.M.P.Nos.191 and 22411 of 2016
1. N. Somasundaram
2. R. Kalaiyarasan
3. P. Davamani .. Petitioners
Vs.
1.The Government of Tamil Nadu,
Represented by its Secretary,
Finance Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.K. Shanmugam, I.A.S.,
Principal Secretary to Government,
Finance Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
3.The Director of Rural Development &
Panchayat Raj Department,
Panagal Building, Saidapet, Chennai – 15. .. Respondents
R2 deleted as per order dated 06.01.2016
by MKKSJ in W.P.No.299 of 2016.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records on the file of the
2nd respondent relating to the issue of 2nd respondent's Letter No.53137/Pay
Cell/2015-1 dated 25.09.2015 and to quash the same.
For Petitioner .. Mr. N. Subramaniyan
For Respondents .. Mr. S. Ravikumar,
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of Certiorari seeking
records relating to a letter dated 25.09.2015 in No.53137/Pay Cell/2015-1
issued by the 2nd respondent and to interfere with the same.
2.It is however, submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners
that the issues raised on similar aspects by other employees had reached the
portals of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and finally, by a judgment in Civil
Appeal No.10029 of 2017 dated 28.11.2019, the Hon'ble Supreme Court
had issued the following directions, which are quite exhaustive in nature:-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
“18.But, it has been more than five years since the directions
were issued by the Division Bench of the High Court and as a
result of the interim orders passed by this Court, the PGRC could
not be set up. In the circumstances, certain modifications in the
directions issued by the Division Bench in para 5 of its order are
called for and we proceed to direct:-
(A) Direction No.(i) as issued by the Division Bench is reiterated
except that Mr. Justice A. S. Venkatachalamoorthy having now
expressed his willingness, Mr. Justice D. Murugesan, formerly
Chief Justice, High Court of Delhi is appointed as Chairman of
the Pay Grievance Redressal Committee.
(B) Direction No.(ii) as issued by the Division Bench is accepted
and it is added that the Chairman of the PGRC will be at liberty
to co-opt any two experts as he deems appropriate as members of
the PGRC, who shall be paid such honorarium by the State
Government, as the Chairman deems appropriate.
(C) Direction Nos.(iii) and (v) to (vii) issued by the Division
Bench are accepted and do not call for any change.
(D) Instead of Rs.1.5 lakhs per month, we fix the honorarium of
the Chairman of the PGRC at 3.5 lakhs per month but the other
pasts of the Direction No.(viii) are maintained.
(E) Direction No.(ix) issued by the Division Bench is accepted
and does not call for any change.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
(F). It is further directed:-
a). Within a week from today, the State Government shall
issue appropriate orders constituting the PGRC as stated
above.
b).Within a week thereafter, the State Government shall
make appropriate and adequate arrangements and provide
office space befitting the status of the Chairperson and
other Members and also provide adequate staff, secretarial
assistance and other facilities.
c).Within two weeks of the constitution of the PGRC all the
concerned individuals/associations shall file their
representations. No representation filed beyond the period
of two weeks shall ordinarily be accepted by the PGRC.
d).Direction No.(iv) issued by the Division Bench shall
stand modified to the aforesaid extent.
e).These directions are in addition to and in further
elaboration of direction No.(vii) issued by the Division
Bench.
3.It is also stated that consequent to the directions, a report had also
been given by the Chairman of PGRC and the matter is now pending for
consideration before a learned Single Judge of this Court on reference by the
Chairman of PGRC. Any decision taken by the learned Single Judge would
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
bind the petitioners.
4.In view of the above, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
Consequently, connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. However,
if the petitioners have any possible grievance, they are always at liberty to
reopen the issue.
06.07.2023
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
smv
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1.The Secretary,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Finance Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.K. Shanmugam, I.A.S.,
Principal Secretary to Government,
Finance Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
3.The Director of Rural Development &
Panchayat Raj Department,
Panagal Building, Saidapet, Chennai – 15.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.
smv
W.P.No.299 of 2016
06.07.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
