← Library
Madras High CourtWP/25097/2013disposed of

S.Rajendran v. The Managing Director

2020-07-28Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 28.07.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P.No.25097 of 2013 And M.P.No.1 of 2013 S.Rajendran ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Transport Corporation (Coimbatore) Ltd., Coimbatore - 43.

2.The District Education Officer, Rajaveedhi, Coimbatore - 641 001.

3.The Head Master, Aided Middle School, Kuppanoor, Coimbatore.

... Respondents Prayer:

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to process the appointment of the petitioner to the post of driver based on the invitation letter dated 14.08.2013 without insisting for a conformation letter from the third respondent School.

For Petitioner : M/s.C.Usha For Respondents : Mr.A.Sundaravadhanam

O R D E R

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to process the appointment of the petitioner to the post of Driver based on the invitation letter dated 14.08.2013 without insisting for a conformation letter from the third respondent

School.

2.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner received an invitation letter from the first respondent Corporation on 26.08.2012 for the post of Driver. In order to join duty, the petitioner was insisted by the first respondent, to produce a confirmation letter from the third respondent. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the certificate produced by the petitioner is genuine one. She would further submit that on verification of the certificate, if the first respondent finds it to be a fake one, then the first respondent may take appropriate action against the petitioner. However, without verification of the certificate produced by the petitioner, the necessity for directing him to produce the confirmation letter does not arise. 4.The learned counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that the petitioner was directed to produce a copy of the certificate along with the original certificate so as to enable the first respondent to compare the original certificate with the copy of the certificate, however, the petitioner without producing the copy of the original certificate, has filed this writ petition.

5.Considering the submissions made on either side, this Court directs the petitioner to produce a copy of the original certificate along with the original certificate before the first respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The first respondent shall compare the certificate pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks thereafter.

6.This writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar pri

To 1.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Transport Corporation (Coimbatore) Ltd., Coimbatore - 43.

2.The District Education Officer, Rajaveedhi, Coimbatore - 641 001.

+1cc to Mr.A.E.Ravi Chandran, Advocate SR.25485 +1cc to Mr.A.Sundaravadhanam, Advocate SR.25372 W.P.No.25097 of 2013 And M.P.No.1 of 2013 VS(CO) CB(15/10/2020)