1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 05/08/2011 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR Writ Petition (MD)No.8772 of 2011 P.Manickam ... Petitioner Vs The Chairman Tuticorin Port Trust Tuticorin. ... 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 19.03.2011 in accordance with law within a time frame fixed by this Hon'ble Court. For petitioner ...Mr.R.Pon Karthikeyan For respondent ...No appearance O R D E R Pleadings disclose that the petitioner entered the Tuticorin Port Trust as LDC on 31.10.1976. Thereafter, gradually reached the post of Wharf Supervisor in the pay scale of Rs.2200-100-4100. On 12.12.1997, he was reverted back to the post of Wharf Supervisor from the post of Wharf Superintendent with immediate effect. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that he should have been reverted to the post of Senior Supervisor. Only after retirement, on 30.04.2005, he came to know that he should have been reverted to the post of Senior Supervisor and not to the post of Supervisor. It is his further case that, annual increments were not paid due to improper fixation of basic pay. 3. The contention of the petitioner is that for counting the reversion period from 12.12.1997 to 11.06.1999, he filed a writ petition in W.P.(MD) No.8308 of 2009, in which, there was a direction to the respondents therein to consider the representation by taking note of the letter dated 07.07.2010 and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 work out the arrears to be paid to the petitioner within the specified time. During the course of argument, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner, the earlier, writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging the order of reversion to the post of Supervisor, and that the same was also dismissed. 4. Pleadings disclose that in the recent representation dated 19.03.2011, addressed to the Traffic Manager, Tuticorin Port Trust, Tuticorin, and the Chairman, Port Trust, Tuticorin, the petitioner has once again made a request to the above said authorities to promote him to the post of Senior Supervisor and sanction one additional increment, which would benefit him for his pensionary benefits. In the year 1997, the petitioner has been reverted to the post of Senior Supervisor and subsequently, according to the learned counsel, challenge to the said order has also been rejected. While that be so, the subsequent representations, claiming reversion to the post of Senior Supervisor, and filing of the writ petition on that basis seeking for a Mandamus from this Court is nothing but a frivolous writ petition and the same deserves to be dismissed with costs. Having suffered an order of dismissal from this Court for the challenge made to the reversion, it is not open to the petitioner to again and again send representations and on that basis seek indulgence of this Court. 5. In such view of the matter, the writ petition is dismissed. This Court, while dismissing the writ petition, is inclined to impose cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) to be paid to the Chairman, Tuticorin Port Trust, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which, the said authority is permitted to invoke the provisions by resorting to the provisions under the Revenue Recovery Act. Sd/- Assistant Registrar /True Copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar To The Chairman Tuticorin Port Trust, Tuticorin +One cc to Mr.R.Ponkarthikeyan, Advocate, SR.No.26512 RR rl/3c – 17.8.2011 Writ Petition No.8772 of 2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/