M THANIKACHALAM Vs. STATE REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition is filed for a direction against the respondents to pay retirement benefits due to the petitioner with interest.

(2.) IT is seen that the petitioner has made a representation to the 1st respondent dated 11. 6. 2006 for which the 3rd respondent has directed to approach the 2nd respondent. Even though the prayer in the writ petition is to direct the respondent to pay the retirement benefits, the learned counsel for the petition would fairly state that the petitioner will be satisfied if a direction is given to the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 11. 6. 06 and pass appropriate orders regarding the payment of pensionary benefits along with the interest as claimed.

(3.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. I. Paranthamen, learned Government Advocate, taking notice on behalf of the respondents.