P.M.MANIKANDAN Vs. STATE OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have filed the present writ petition seeking for a direction to pay subsistence allowance in pursuant to the order of suspension made against them on 14.7.2012. The petitioners were suspended with effect from 14.7.2012 on certain irregularities and pending enquiry, the suspension was made. It is the stand of the petitioners that subsequent to the suspension, the respondents are not paying any subsistence allowance and therefore the writ petition is filed seeking for a direction to the respondents to pay subsistence allowance in accordance with law.

(2.) When this writ petition came up 7.1.2013, this Court directed Mr. S. Muthuraj, learned Standing counsel for TASMAC to take notice and get instructions from the respondents. Subsequently, on 22.1.2013, time was taken to get instructions and hence the matter was directed to be posted under the caption for orders. Even today, there is no response forthcoming.

(3.) Ms. Lesi Saravanan, learned counsel for the petitioners states that the issue relating to payment of Subsistence Allowance in respect of employees of TASMAC is no longer res integra. Already, this Court by judgment in N. Renganathan v. District Manager, TASMAC in W.P. Nos. 24146 and 24394 of 2009 has gone into the entire issue and directed that employees who are placed under suspension by the TASMAC pending enquiry are entitled to be paid subsistence allowance. In paragraphs 6 to 13, it was held as follows: