IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE: 13-08-2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN Writ Petition No.2575 of 2001 S.Lalitha .. Petitioner. Versus 1.The Director of Technical Education, Chennai-600 025. 2.The Secretary, Arulmigu Palani Andavar Polytechnic (Men) Palani-624 601. .. Respondents. Prayer: This petition has been filed seeking for a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the proceedings of the second respondent on its file pertaining to S.M.Ka.Na.Ka.No.33/A2/89, dated 18.1.2000, and quash the same and direct the respondents each of them to give order of regularisation of the petitioner to the post of Lecturer with retrospective effect from 15.7.1987 and pay the back wages and attendant benefits. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Ravi For Respondents : Mr.B.K.Girish Neelkantan (R1) Additional Government Pleader Mr.D.Rajendran (R2) O R D E R This writ petition has been filed seeking for a direction to the respondents to regularise the petitioner in the post of Lecturer, with retrospective effect, from 15.07.1987 and to pay the backwages due to her, along with all the attendant benefits. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents. 3. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that he may be permitted to withdraw the writ petition with the liberty to challenge the recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner to recover the differential salary paid to her during the period when she had worked in the promotional post. He has also made an endorsement to that effect. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4. At this juncture the learned counsel for the petitioner had placed before this Court an order, dated 22.04.2003, passed by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1634 of 2003. Paragraph 3 of the said order is as follows: "We can't grant a prayer which will have the effect of setting at naught the reversion so as to enable the appellant to occupy the promotional post. The appellant has to work in the existing post until her right is established in the writ petition for the promotional post. But insofar as the action of the respondents in seeking to recover the differential salary, which was paid while the appellant worked in the promotional post is concerned there shall be stay of recovery of such amount, pending disposal of the writ petition." 5. The learned counsel has further submitted that after the withdrawal of the present writ petition, the respondents may initiate proceedings against the petitioner to recover the differential salary paid to her in the promoted post, as the stay order granted by this Court in W.A.No.1634 of 2003, by its order, dated 22.04.2003, would also come to an end. Therefore, it has been prayed that this Court may be pleased to permit the petitioner to challenge the recovery proceedings in the manner known to law. 6. Based on the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and in view of the endorsement made, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. However, it is open to the petitioner to challenge the recovery proceedings of the respondents seeking to recover the differential salary paid to the petitioner in the promotional post, if so advised, in accordance with law. No costs. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar csh To The Director of Technical Education, Chennai-600 025. 1 cc To The Government Pleader, SR.45220. Writ Petition No.2575 of 2001 PA(CO) RVL 27.08.2008 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/