IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 29.06.2017 CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P.No.14222 of 2017 and WMP No.15414 of 2017
1. Union of India Rep.by the Chief Postmaster General Tamil Nadu Circle Anna Salai Chennai – 600 002.
2. Superintendent of Post Offices Theni Division Theni – 625 531. ...Petitioners vs.
1.S.M.Raja 2.The Central Administrative Tribunal Rep.by its Registrar Madras Bench Chennai - 600 104. ..Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying a writ of certiorari calling for the records of second respondent and quash the order dated 25.04.2016 in OA.No.310/00617/2015 as the same is unsustainable.
For Petitioners : Mr.V.P.Sengottuvel (SCGSC) For Respondents : Mr.C.Premkumar for Mr.R.Malaichamy for R1 R2 - Tribunal
O R D E R
K.K. SASIDHARAN,J.
The claim made by the first respondent for compassionate appointment was rejected by the first petitioner by order dated 23 February 2015. The said order was put in issue before the Madras Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal.
2. The Tribunal, even without giving an opportunity to the petitioners to file reply statement, disposed of the Original Application with a direction to consider the case of the first respondent afresh as per the then existing Scheme. The order is under challenge at the instance of the Postal Department.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. We have also heard the learned counsel for the first respondent.
4. The first respondent challenged the order dated 23 February 2015 before the Central Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal was expected to consider the merits of the matter and pass orders in accordance with law. The Tribunal in its anxiety to do justice, directed the petitioners to consider the matter afresh, without even quashing the impugned order. The Tribunal without giving sufficient opportunity to the petitioners to file reply statement, disposed of the Original Application without considering the legality and correctness of the order impugned in the Original Application. We are therefore, of the view that the impugned order is liable to be set aside.
5. In the result, the order dated 25 April 2016 is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration.
6. The petitioners are given three weeks time to file reply statement.
The Tribunal is requested to dispose of the Original Application as expeditiously as possible and in any case, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
K.K.SASIDHARAN,J.
and M.DHANDAPANI,J.
(dna/gms) The writ petition is allowed as indicated above. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
dna/gms (K.K.SASIDHARAN.,J.) (M.DHANDAPANI.,J.) 29 June 2017 To The Registrar Central Administrative Tribunal Madras Bench Chennai - 600 104.
W.P.No.14222 of 2017