K.Manickavasagam, v. The Director Of Rural

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02.03.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN W.P.No.5235/2017 K.Manickavasagam ..

Petitioner Vs 1.The Director of Rural Development & Panchayat Raj, Panagal Buildings Saidapet, Chennai-15.

2.The District Collector Perambalur, Perambalur District.

..

Respondents Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's appeal dated 10.01.2017 preferred against the order of the 2nd respondent in Na.Ka.No.3919/2016/Pa.A5 dated 18.11.2016 and pass appropriate orders thereon within a time limit to be fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner :

Mr.P.Rajendiran For Respondents :

Mr.M.E.Rani Selvam, AGP

ORDER

By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. Mr. learned Additional Government Pleader accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

The petitioner was appointed as Panchayat Clerk on 01.12.1996 in Noothapur Panchayat, Veppanthattai Panchayat Union, Perambulur District and during the course of employment, met with an accident and his leg was fractured and was admitted in a hospital as an Inpatient on 02.02.2000. The petitioner applied for medical leave and his application was forwarded to the Collector of Perambalur District on 06.03.2000 and in the interregnum, the President of the Local Body has appointed his son-in-law as Panchayat Clerk with effect from 11.02.2000 and in this regard, the Block Development Officer, has also called for an explanation from the President of the Local Body. The petitioner was repeatedly submitting representations praying for his reinstatement in service and his representation was rejected by the 2nd respondent vide proceedings dated 18.11.2016. The petitioner, aggrieved by the same, submitted an appeal with the 1st respondent on 10.01.2017 and though it was received and acknowledged, so far no orders have been passed and therefore, came forward to file the present writ petition.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.M.E.Rani Selvam, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing the respondents.

This Court, taking into consideration the limited scope of prayer sought for by the petitioner and without going into the merits of the claim projected by the petitioner, directs the 1st respondent, to put the concerned person/s on notice and thereafter, consider the appeal memorandum/petition dated 10.01.2017 submitted by the petitioner, on merits and in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the decision taken, to the petitioners. The writ petition stands disposed of with the above direction. No costs.

02.03.2017 Index :

No Internet :

Yes AP M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.,

AP To 1.The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, Ripon Building, Chennai-3.

2.The Superintending Engineer {Electrical} Corporation of Chennai, Rippon Building Chennai 600 003.

W.P.No.5235/2017 02.03.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in