V.Irudayaraj v. The Principal District Judge, Madurai, Madurai District
Case at a glance
- Bench
- G R SWAMINATHAN, R POORNIMA
Outcome
Disposed of
This writ petition is disposed of accordingly
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. (G.R.S. J.,) & (R.P. J.,) 09.06.2026NCC : Yes/NoIndex : Yes / NoInternet : Yes/ NoiasTo:1.The Principal District Judge, Madurai, Madurai District. 2. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai, Madurai District. 3. The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai…
Judgment
W.P.(MD)No.29127 of 2024BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED : 09.06.2026CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHANandTHE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMAW.P.(MD)No.29127 of 2024andW.M.P.(MD)No.24640 of 2024V.Irudayaraj ... PetitionerVs1.The Principal District Judge, Madurai, Madurai District.
The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai, Madurai District.
The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai, Madurai District.... RespondentsPrayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to the impugned charged memo issued by the 3rd respondent in D.E.No.11/2020 dated 25.06.2020 and consequential final order passed by the 1st respondent in D.E.No.11/2020 dated 16.10.2023 and to quash 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.29127 of 2024the same and consequently direct the respondents to permit the petitioner having retired from service on 30.06.2019 on the date of the petitioner superannuation with all attended benefits and continuity of service. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Karthikeya VenkatachalapathyFor Respondents : Mr.D.Venkatesh, Standing Counsel. ORDER (Order of the Court was delivered by G.R.Swaminathan, J.)Heard both sides. 2. The writ petitioner was a court staff who was removed from service vide order dated 16.10.2023. Against the said order, an appeal would lie before the Registrar General. Instead, the petitioner chose to file this writ petition. 3. Since the order is appealable, it is only just and proper that the petitioner exhausts the appeal remedy. The petitioner is given four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order to file an appeal before the Registrar General. If such an appeal is filed within the aforesaid time 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.29127 of 2024limit, it shall be entertained without reference to limitation. We also would direct the appellate authority to dispose of the appeal, if filed within the said time limit, within a period of six months thereafter. We clarify that we have not gone into the merits of the matter.
Operative part
This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. (G.R.S. J.,) & (R.P. J.,) 09.06.2026NCC : Yes/NoIndex : Yes / NoInternet : Yes/ NoiasTo:1.The Principal District Judge, Madurai, Madurai District. 2. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai, Madurai District. 3. The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai, Madurai District.3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.29127 of 2024G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.andR.POORNIMA, J.iasW.P.(MD)No.29127 of 2024 09.06.20264/4
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: This writ petition is disposed of accordingly
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.