SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 47876

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.T. Asha, J
B.Venkatesan – Appellant
Versus
Secretary to Government Home (Pol.2) Department – Respondent
Writ Petition



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Alagu Gowtham, M.Muthappan
For the Respondents: V.Prasad

A public authority has a legal duty to dispose of a pending statutory memorial or representation within a reasonable time, particularly when the underlying grounds for disciplinary action, such as a criminal conviction, have been overturned by an acquittal.

Headnote:The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the authorities to dispose of a memorial challenging an order of removal from service. The petitioner had been acquitted in the underlying criminal proceedings that prompted the departmental inquiry. The court, noting the limited scope of the prayer and lack of strong objection from the state, directed the statutory authority to consider the pending memorial within a stipulated timeframe. Issues involved concern the obligation of the state to process departmental representations upon a change in circumstances, specifically an acquittal. The ratio rests on the administrative duty to consider pending representations in a time-bound manner, ensuring adherence to merit-based decision-making in service matters. The writ petition is allowed with a mandate to decide the representation within three months.

Table of Content
1. the court directs time-bound performance of a statutory duty when there is no opposition to the petitioner's request. (Para 4)

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-

“directing the Respondents to pass orders on the Memorial Submitted by the petitioner dated 05.3.2026, challenging the punishment of removal from service imposed by the 3rd respondent in PR No.5/ 2010 dated 29.06.2011, confirmed by the 2nd Respondent in Rc. No. 11332/AP.3 (1) / 2026 dated

26.07.2017 within a limited time frame as deem fit by this Honble court.” 2. The main grievance of the petitioner is that, despite being acquitted in the criminal case on the basis of which departmental proceedings were initiated against him and which culminated in the punishment of removal from service, the respondents have failed to reinstate him into service. Further, the Memorial dated 05.03.2026 preferred by the petitioner before the 2nd respondent challenging the order imposing the punishment of removal from service has not been disposed of to date.

3.Heard the learned counsel on either side.

4. Considering the limited prayer sought for by the petitioner and the absence of any serious objection from the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents, the Writ Petition is allowed. The 2nd respondent is directed to dispose of the Memorial preferred by the petitioner dated 05.03.2026, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top