Madras High Court
The Engineer In Chief And vs S.Sridhar on 17 October, 2024
Author: P.Velmurugan
Bench: P.Velmurugan
W.A(MD)No.1945 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 17.10.2024
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN
W.A(MD)No.1945 of 2024
and
C.M.P(MD)No.14398 of 2024
1.The Engineer in Chief and
Chief Engineer (General),
Public Works Department,
Chepauk,
Chennai-5.
2.The Chief Engineer,
Public Works Department,
Trichy Region,
Trichy District.
3.The Engineer in Chief and
Chief Engineer (General),
Water Resource Department,
Chepauk,
Chennai-5. .. Appellants / Respondents
Vs.
S.Sridhar .. Respondent/Writ Petitioner
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A(MD)No.1945 of 2024
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act praying this
Court to set aside the order of this Court made in W.P(MD)No.3220 of 2024
dated 01.04.2024.
For Appellants : Mr.PT.Thiraviam
Government Advocate
For Respondent : Mr.Aayiram K Selvakumar
JUDGMENT
(Order of the Court was made by P.VELMURUGAN., J)
This Writ Appeal is directed against the order of this Court made in
W.P(MD)No.3220 of 2024 dated 01.04.2024.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the
materials placed before this Court.
3. The respondent filed the Writ Petition before the Writ Court challenging
the order passed by the first respondent, dated 05.01.2024 and for consequential
direction to promote him based on the seniority list for the year 2019-2020. After
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
considering the facts and materials placed before the Court, the learned Single
Judge observed as follows:
“9. So, the petitioner can give a representation to the
respondents to consider his request in order to give some
notional effect from the year 2019-2020 through which his
name was approved to be promoted to the next level of
'Technical Assistant'. On receipt of the same, the
respondents shall consider the same and pass appropriate
orders within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt
of a copy of this order.”
4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the appellants
submitted that this appeal is filed on the apprehension that based on the
representation of the petitioner the appellants has to consider the case of the writ
petitioner and to give some notional effect from the year 2019-2020 through
which his name was approved to be promoted to the next level of 'Technical
Assistant'. However, reading of the above order, it is clear that the learned Single
Judge did not give any positive direction as represented by the learned
Government Advocate and it is only a direction to the appellants that they shall
consider the representation of the writ petitioner and pass appropriate orders.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5. Under these circumstances, this Court does not find any merit in the Writ
Appeal calling for interference by this Court in the order of the learned Single
Judge. However, it is made clear that in case, the respondent/writ petitioner made
a representation, the appellants shall consider the same and pass appropriate
orders on merits and in accordance with law.
6. With the above direction, the Writ Appeal is disposed of. No Costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[P.V.,J.] [K.K.R.K.,J.]
17.10.2024
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
PJL
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
P.VELMURUGAN, J.
and
K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN,J.
PJL
and
17.10.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
