1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.12.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.(MD)No.14367 of 2011 Mari ... Petitioner Vs. The Commissioner, Corporation of Madurai, Anna Maligai, Madurai-2. ... Respondent Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 30.04.2008, requesting the period 05.09.2001 to 19.06.2007 may be treated as duty period for which the pay and allowances may be paid accordingly. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kanagarajan For Respondent : Mr.B.Ashok O R D E R The petitioner S.Mari S/o. Sakkarai has filed the present Writ Petition seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 30.04.2008, wherein he made a request to treat the period from 05.09.2001 to 19.06.2007 as a duty period, so as to receive pay and allowance. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that when the petitioner was serving as a Sweeper in Ward No.40, Madurai Corporation South Zone, Madurai, he suffered a criminal case filed under Section 302 I.P.C. in Crime No.512 of 2001, by the Inspector of Police, Teppakulam Police Station, Madurai, which culminated into one of life imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/-, in default to undergo 6 months R.I., and for the offence under Section 148 I.P.C., he was sentenced to undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment, for the offence under Section 506 (ii) I.P.C., one year rigorous imprisonment. However, all the sentences were directed to run concurrently by judgment dated 24.03.2004. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal in C.A.No.578 of 2004. The said appeal was allowed by setting aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the Additional District and Sessions Court (Fast Track Court No.III), Madurai by judgment dated 09.11.2006. In the mean https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 while, the petitioner was suspended from service from 05.09.2001 to 19.06.2007. After the appeal, preferred by the petitioner came to be allowed in his favour on 09.11.2006, he was reinstated from service as Sweeper on 20.06.2007. Since then he has been working as a Sweeper in the same Ward No.40, Madurai Corporation South Zone, Madurai without any hindrance. In the mean while, the petitioner was also issued with show cause notice on 24.04.2008, calling upon the petitioner to submit his explanation. Under such circumstances, it is not known whether the petitioner is entitled to treat the period from 05.09.2001 to 19.06.2007 as a duty period as he was imprisoned during the said period in jail. However, the representation dated 30.04.2008 pending on the file of the respondent Corporation needs to be disposed of, on the basis whether he was given benefit of doubt by the Additional District and Session Judge. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent also submits that within a reasonable time the representation would be considered on merits and in accordance with law. 4. Recording the said submission, the respondent, the Commissioner, Corporation of Madurai is directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 30.04.2008 on merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. It is made clear that this Court does not express anything on the merits of the case. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Sd/- Deputy Registrar(Accounts) /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar To The Commissioner, Corporation of Madurai, Anna Maligai, Madurai-2. akv rl/2c – 4.1.2012 W.P.(MD)No.14367 of 2011 16.12.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/