Madras High CourtWP/5645/2017disposed of

Sharmila v. The Government Of Tamil Nadu

2017-03-21Honourable Mr Justice M.M.Sundresh3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 21.03.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH W.P. No. 5645 of 2017 Sharmila

...Petitioner

- Vs -

1. The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare, Fort, St.Geroge, Chennai - 600 009.

2. The Director, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare, Triplicane, Chennai - 600 005.

3. The District Collector, Collectrate, Sathuvacherry, Vellore District.

4. The District Adi Dravidar and and Tribal Welfare Office, Collector Office, Sathuvacherry, Vellore District.

5. The Special Tahsildar, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare, cum Land Acquisition, Tirupattur District, Vellore District.

6. V.Kulothungan ... Respondents Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the fifth respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 19.01.2017 and to pay the default amount to the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Ms.M.Malar For Respondents : Mr.K.Dhananjeyan, Spl. Govt. Pleader for R1 to R5

ORDER

The petitioner seeks a direction to the fifth respondent to consider her representation dated 19.01.2017. 2.This case has got a chequered history. An award was passed as early as 29.03.1986. The petitioner's father's reference was answered by enhancing the compensation, which was also confirmed by this Court in A.S.No.579 of 2003. In compliance of the same, the first respondent passed an order in G.O.No.233 Adi Dravidar and Trial Welfare Department dated 28.10.2013 directing the fifth respondent to take steps to deposit the amount before the Reference Court. As the same has not been done till now, the petitioner has come forward to file this writ petition. 3.It is unfortunate that the petitioner has been made to run from pillar to post. She claims the entitlement based upon the compromise decree in O.S.No.

92 of 2009 on the file of the Sub Court, Tirupathur dated 18.08.2012 between herself and the sixth respondent, who is none other than her father, being the original claimant. Now the petitioner wants consideration of the representation pending with the fifth respondent. 4.In such view of the matter, the fifth respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders on the representation dated 19.01.2017 within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is needless to state that the fifth respondent shall take appropriate steps to comply with the order passed by the first respondent in G.O.No.233 Adi Dravidar and Trial Welfare Department dated 28.10.2013, if not complied with already.

5.With the above direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Deputy Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mmi