Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 6 - June 12 2022

Citations: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 239 To 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 247 NOMINAL INDEX K Ravichandran and others v. The Chief Secretary and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 239 S Nalini v The Deputy Inspector General of Prisons and another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 240 P Arumugam v. The General Manager(Administration) TNCSC and another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 241 S Gopikrishnan v. Regional Officer, CBFC and others, 2022 LiveLaw(Mad) 242 Deputy Commissioner of Police v. C Duraisamy, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 243 P. Sukumar v. The State of Tamil Nadu and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 244 State v. A Duraimurugan Pandian Sattai @ Duraimurugan and Another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 245 Northern Arc Capital Limited v Sambandh Finance Private Limited and others, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 246 K Arumugam v State and another, 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 247 REPORTS 1. "Public Duty On Government Pay Dues": Madras High Court Directs Government To Pay Gratuity And Other Benefits To Employees Of Co-Operative Societies Case Title: K Ravichandran and others v. The Chief Secretary and others Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 239 Justice M. S Ramesh of the Madras High Court recently came to the rescue of employees of Co-operative societies and directed the Chief Secretary, the Secretary (Co-operation), and the Registrar of Co-operative societies, Government of Puducherry to pass orders for disbursement of unpaid salaries, earned leave encashment, EPF Contributions, ESI benefits, and other admissible entailments, due to them for their respective services. The court directed the dues to be paid within three months from receipt of copy of the order. The court held that even though Society cannot be Characterized as a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution, a writ was maintainable to enforce a statutory public duty cast upon the Society. In the present case, since there was a public duty upon the Government, the petition was maintainable. 2. Rajiv Gandhi Assassination Case: Convict Nalini Withdraws Plea Seeking Emergency Leave For Husband Murugan Case Title: S Nalini v The Deputy Inspector General of Prisons and another Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 240 S. Nalini, who was one of the convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi Assassination Case, recently withdrew an application she had moved before the Madras High Court seeking emergency leave for her husband- Sridharan alias Murugan, another convict in the case. When the matter came up before the bench of Justice S Vaidyanathan and Justice A D Jagadish Chandra on Monday, the prison officials informed the Court that Nalini's representation was rejected in light of the prison offences committed by her husband Murugan. The Superintendent had passed the aforesaid order in terms of Rule 12 of Tamil Nadu Suspension of Sentence Rules, 1982. In light of the same, the petitioner decided to withdraw the present writ petition and challenge the order of rejection passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Prisons before the appellate authority. 3. Delay In Consideration Of Representations By Statutory Authorities Amounts To Dereliction Of Duty: Madras High Court Case Title: P Arumugam v. The General Manager(Administration) TNCSC and another Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 241 The Madras High Court recently observed that whenever complaints are made to the Statutory Authorities, they are expected to act upon the same and not keep it pending indefinitely. The authorities are expected to consider the matter on merits and pass appropriate orders in reasonable time. Justice MS Ramesh of the Madurai Bench observed as follows: "It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon the respondents to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. As such, non-consideration of the representation by the Statutory Authority would amount to dereliction of duty and hence, this Court will be justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and direct them to consider the same within a stipulated time." 3. Plea Seeking Statutory Warning For Violent Movie Scenes Withdrawn After Madras High Court Warns Of Imposing Costs Case Title: S Gopikrishnan v. Regional Officer, CBFC and others Citation: 2022 LiveLaw(Mad) 242 A litigant on Wednesday withdrew his petition in Madras High Court seeking directions to the Central Board of Film Certification to telecast statutory warning with the words "Knives and Sickles used in this movie are made of paper and colour water is used as blood" in forthcoming films. The plea was withdrawn after the bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice N Mala warned of dismissing the plea with costs. The bench observed that the petition was moved merely for publicity and without any ...

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: June 6 - June 12 2022

Upasana Sajeev

Tags