Are you looking for a legal research tool ?
Get Started
Do check other products like LIBIL, a legal due diligence tool to get a litigation check report and Case Management tool to monitor and collaborate on cases.

Lakshmi v. The State Government Of Tamilnadu, Represented By Its District Collector, Villupuram And Others

Lakshmi v. The State Government Of Tamilnadu, Represented By Its District Collector, Villupuram And Others

(High Court Of Judicature At Madras)

Civil Revision Petition No. 2131 Of 2010 & M.P. No. 1 Of 2010 | 27-09-2013

(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed Article 227 of Constitution of India against the order dated 01.04.2010 passed by the District Munsif Court, Kallakurichi in I.A.No.727 of 2010 in O.S.No.69 of 2010.)

1. This civil revision petition is filed against the order made in I.A.No.727 of 2010 in I.A.No.305 of 2010 in O.S.No.69 of 2010, staying the order made in I.A.No.305 of 2010 pending disposal of I.A.No.726 of 2010.

2. The petitioner herein as the plaintiff filed O.S.No.69 of 2010 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Kallakurichi, seeking for declaration to declare the entry made in the Service Register with regard to her date of birth as 13.03.1952 as null and void and for restraining the defendants from giving retirement to the plaintiff based on the said date of birth. Along with the said suit, the petitioner filed I.A.No.305 of 2010, seeking for interim injunction restraining the respondents/defendants from giving retirement to the petitioner/plaintiff by treating her date of birth as 13.03.1952. The trial court by an order dated 31.03.2010, after hearing both sides, granted interim injunction as prayed for. Immediately, the respondents herein filed I.A.No.726 of 2010 seeking for review of the said interim order granted by the trial court on 31.03.2010. Pending disposal of the said review petition, the respondents herein also sought for interim stay of the order passed in I.A.No.727/2010. The said order of stay granted by the trial court is challenged in this civil revision petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

4. The petitioner herein as the plaintiff filed a suit against the respondents for a declaration to declare that the entry made in the Service Register with regard to her date of birth as 13.03.1952 as null and void. Pending disposal of the said suit, the respondents were restrained by way of an interim order granted on 31.03.2010 from retiring the petitioner by taking note of her date of birth as 13.03.1952. According to the petitioner, her date of birth is 01.01.1960. Whether it is 01.01.1960 or 13.03.1952, has to be decided only in the main suit. In the meantime, the petitioner was granted an interim order restraining the defendants from retiring her from service by taking the date of birth as 13.03.1952. The respondents wanted the court below to review the said interim order. Now, at this stage, the matter is pending and the suit has not been disposed of in view of the pendency of the present civil revision petition. Considering all these facts and circumstances, I am of the view that it would suffice if the trial court is directed to take up the suit and dispose of the same along with the review petition in I.A.No.726 of 2010 within a stipulated time.

5. Therefore, without going into the merits and contentions of the rival parties, this civil revision petition is disposed of with a direction to the court below to take up the suit in O.S.No.69 of 2010 along with I.A.Nos.726 and 727 of 2010 and dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. The connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Advocate List
  • For the Petitioner P. Sesubalan Raja, Advocate. For the Respondents R1, Mrs. M. Jayasree, R3, M/s. R. Revathy, Advocates.
Bench
  • HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. RAVICHANDRABAABU
Eq Citations
  • LQ/MadHC/2013/4604
Head Note

Service Law — Retirement — Interim order restraining retirement — Review of — Interim order restraining retirement by taking note of date of birth as 13.03.1952 — Whether reviewable — Held, whether it is 01.01.1960 or 13.03.1952, has to be decided only in main suit — In the meantime, petitioner was granted an interim order restraining defendants from retiring her from service by taking date of birth as 13.03.1952 — Respondents wanted court below to review said interim order — In view of pendency of present civil revision petition, matter is pending and suit has not been disposed of — Trial court directed to take up suit and dispose of same along with review petition within stipulated time — Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Or.47 Rr.1 & 2 & Or.49-A — Constitution of India — Arts.226 and 136 — Service Law — Date of Birth — Retirement — Review of interim order restraining retirement