Madras High Court
WP/4669/2017 of S.D.Sadhish Kumar Vs Union of India on 7 October 2026
WP No. 4669 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 07-10-2026
CORAM
CNR: {HCMA011648552017}
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR
WP No. 4669 of 2017
and
WMP Nos.4911 of 2017; 19043 of 2021; 8574 & 8579 of 2026
S.D.Sadhish Kumar
S/o. S. Devarajan,
No.2, A Block, CPT Officers Quarters,
Near Napier Bridge, Kamarajar Salai,
Chennai-9.
..Petitioner
Vs
1. Union of India,
Rep. by Secretary to Government,
Ministry of Shipping, No.1,
Parliamentary Street,
New Delhi-110 001.
2. Union of India
Rep. by Secretary to Government,
Ministry of Finance,
New Delhi-110 001.
3. Chennai Port Trust
Rep. by its Chairman, Rajaji Salai,
Chennai-1
4. The Secretary
Chennai Port Trust, Rajaji Salai,
Chennai-1
5. Financial Advisor and Chief Accounts Officer, Chennai Port Trust, Rajaji Salai, Chennai-1
..Respondent(s)
WP No. 4669 of 2017
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order of the 5th respondent bearing No.CDN/ 001632/2016/F
dated 30.12.2016 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 3
to 5 to restore the petitioner Pay Scale of Rs.32,900 - 58,000/- with effect from April 2008 onwards and to disburse the arrears of pay and allowances within a time frame.
For Petitioner :
Mr. M. Kempraj
For Respondent :
Ms. N. K. Nithila Vani, (for R1 & R2)
Central Government Standing Counsel
Mr. Arun Dhanapalan (for R3 to R5)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and the learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 to 5 through video conferencing mode.
2. The petitioner, by the present writ petition, has assailed the action of the fifth respondent in issuing the impugned order dated 30.12.2016 and to quash the same, with a consequential direction to the third to fifth respondents to restore his pay scale with effect from April 2008 onwards and higher pay scale.
WP No. 4669 of 2017
3. When the writ petition is taken up for hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the fifth respondent had issued common impugned proceedings in respect of various employees working under the third respondent, including the petitioner; and that on a challenge being made to the said proceedings by similarly placed employees before this Court, a Coordinate Bench of this Court, by its order dated 03.07.2017 in W.P.Nos.2158 to 2160 of 2017, had set aside the impugned order on the ground that the said order had been passed without providing opportunity to the employees.
4. It is also further contended that another Coordinate Bench of this Court, by its order dated 27.07.2016 in W.P.Nos.25462 to 25466 of 2016, had also considered the said impugned proceedings and thus, the orders passed by this Court in the aforesaid writ petitions would squarely be applicable to the case of the present writ petition.
5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents 3 to 5 does not dispute the aforesaid statement made on behalf of the petitioner.
6. I have taken note of the contentions urged by the learned counsel on either side.
WP No. 4669 of 2017
7. Admittedly, the fifth respondent, before issuing the impugned proceedings, did not issue any notice to the petitioner and, by a unilateral act, had issued the impugned proceedings.
8. Taking note of the said unilateral act, this Court, in its order dated 03.07.2017 in W.P.No.2158 of 2017, had observed that this Court is not inclined to adjudicate on the merits of the matter, as the impugned order was issued without complying with the basic principles of natural justice and also considering the principle that no employee can be deprived of the scale of pay without providing an opportunity, had set aside the proceeding impugned therein.
9. This Court is of the view that the view taken by the Coordinate Bench is also applicable to the present case. Thus, in order to maintain parity and judicial discipline, this Court is of the view that the impugned proceedings, which have already been set aside by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in respect of the petitioners therein, the petitioner in the present case being similarly placed, is entitled to be granted the same relief.
10. Thus, the impugned proceeding, insofar as the petitioner is concerned, is set aside. The respondents are directed to take further action in terms of the order dated 03.07.2017 in W.P.Nos.2158 to 2160 of 2017.
WP No. 4669 of 2017
11. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of as noted above. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed. No order as to costs. 07-10-2026 (2/2) Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No KLT To
1. The Secretary to Government, Union of India, Ministry of Shipping, No.1, Parliamentary Street, New Delhi-110 001.
2. The Secretary to Government, Union of India, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi-110 001.
3. The Chairman, Chennai Port Trust, Rajaji Salai, Chennai-1.
4. The Secretary, Chennai Port Trust, Rajaji Salai, Chennai-1
5. Financial Advisor and Chief Accounts Officer, Chennai Port Trust, Rajaji Salai, Chennai-1.
WP No. 4669 of 2017
T.VINOD KUMAR, J. KLT WP No. 4669 of 2017 and WMP Nos.4911 of 2017; 19043 of 2021; 8574 & 8579 of 2026 07-10-2026 (2/2)