G.Kumar, v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 11.12.2019

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR W.P.No.22250 of 2013 and W.M.P.No.31920 of 2018 G.Kumar ....Petitioner Vs 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruvannamalai.

2.The Tahsildar, Chengam Taluk, Tiruvannamalai.

3.The District Employment Officer, Tiruvannamalai.

...Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of mandamus, directing the 3rd respondent to consider and sponsor the petitioner's name to the 2nd respondent for the appointment of Village Assistant post with the approval of the 1st respondent based on the petitioner's representations dated 12.11.2012 and 08.06.2013, within a time to be stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Krishnaman for Mr.A.Sivaji For Respondents : Mr.J.Ramesh Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

The petitioner has come up with the present writ petition for a mandamus, directing the third respondent to consider and sponsor his name to the second respondent for appointment as Village Assistant with the approval of the first respondent based on his representations dated 12.11.2012 and 08.06.2013.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents and perused the materials available on record.

3. According to the petitioner, his juniors were appointed as Village Assistants by the second respondent, by over looking his seniority. Hence, he made a representation to https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

the third respondent on 12.11.2012 and to the respondents 1 to 3 on 08.06.2013. Since there is no response, the present writ petition has been filed.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that he is not pressing the representation dated 08.06.2013, however, the representation dated 12.11.2012 may be considered and pass orders within the time as may be fixed by this Court.

5. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that if no orders have been passed on the representation dated 12.11.2012, the same will be considered on merits and in accordance with law.

6. By considering the aforesaid facts, without expressing any view on merits of the claim made by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to pass the following orders : (i) the third respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 12.11.2012 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order ;

(ii) if any orders have been passed by the third respondent, the same shall be communicated to the petitioner forthwith.

7. With the above directions the writ petition is disposed of. However, there is no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar ms To 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruvannamalai.

2.The Tahsildar, Chengam Taluk, Tiruvannamalai.

3.The District Employment Officer, Tiruvannamalai.

+1 cc to Government Pleader Sr.No. 103665,103664 +1cc to Mr.A.Sivaji,Advocate SR.No. 103303 W.P.No.22250 of 2013 A.SK(22/01/2020) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/