Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.DHANDAPANI
K. Dhiekshaya – Appellant
Versus
State Of Tamil Nadu, Represented By Its Principal Secretary, Health And Family Welfare Department – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. claim for stipend arrears based on government orders. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. petitioners seek prompt consideration of their representations. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court orders timely action on the representations. (Para 7) |
| 4. writ petitions disposed of with specified directions. (Para 8) |
ORDER :
M. DHANDAPANI, J.
Mr.K.Tippu Sulthan, learned Government Advocate takes notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent, the writ petitions are taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
2.The writ petitions have been filed seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 5 and 6 to pay the difference of accumulated stipend arrears amount to the tune of Rs.1,40,000/-, Rs.1,79,000/-, Rs.2,34,000/-, Rs.2,71,000/-, Rs.1,20,000/- and Rs.1,20,000/- respectively, in favour of the petitioners, together with interest till date, for the service rendered by the petitioners during February 2022 to April 2023, February 2022 to April 2023, August 2021 to March 2023, July 2021 to August 2023, April 2022 to April 2023, March 2022 to March 2023 respectively.
3.The case of the petitioners is that, the petitioners pursued their Post Diploma DNB in Obstetrics and Gynaecology at
The court mandates the prompt consideration of stipend arrears representations, emphasizing the obligation of government authorities to act within a specified timeframe.
The court emphasized the duty of the state to timely consider representations and fulfill financial obligations toward its employees.
The court mandates timely payment of dues as per government orders and upholds the consideration of representations.
The Court affirms the need for timely consideration of administrative representations regarding stipend arrears under government orders.
A court may direct respondents to consider representations and render decisions in accordance with the law within a defined period.
The Court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation regarding stipend arrears and provided a timeline for compliance.
The court directed responsive action on the petitioner's representation without expressing any opinion on merits.
The court directed respondents to consider the petitioner’s request for stipend arrears, emphasizing procedural compliance without addressing substantive merits.
Mandamus directing agency to consider representation for payment of stipulated arrears based on ensuring adherence to government orders.
The court established the procedural obligation of administrative respondents to consider representations within a stipulated time frame.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
