Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, K. Muniyasamy, an employee of the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (KMB) Ltd., filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court. The respondents were the Managing Director and General Manager of the Corporation. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to disburse his salary for the months of February and March 2022, and for fifteen days of April 2022, along with interest at 6% per annum, based on his representation dated 9.11.2024. The grievance arose from the non-payment of salary for that period. When the matter came up for hearing, the court heard the counsel for the petitioner, Mr. K. Gokul, and the standing counsel for the respondents, Mr. K. Jegadeesh Balan. After perusing the materials on record, the court observed that the relief sought was limited. In such circumstances, the court deemed it appropriate to dispose of the petition without going into the merits of the case. The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 9.11.2024 in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders within a stipulated time. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the representation within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. No order as to costs was made. The judgment does not lay down any new legal principle but follows the settled practice of directing consideration of representations in writ jurisdiction when limited relief is sought.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Article 226 Constitution of India - Court disposed of writ petition seeking salary arrears by directing respondents to consider representation within four weeks without entering into merits. Held that in such limited relief, appropriate to direct consideration of representation. (Paras 3-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ of mandamus should be issued to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation for disbursement of unpaid salary with interest
Final Decision
The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 09.11.2024 in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Writ jurisdiction may be invoked for directing consideration of pending representation
- Court can dispose of petition without entering into merits when limited relief is sought
