Madras High CourtWP/4888/2019disposed of

B.Chandramohan v. The Chief Secretary

2022-12-05Honourable Mr Justice M.S. Ramesh6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 05.12.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH and W.M.P.No.5569 of 2019 B. Chandramohan ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Chief Secretary, Chief Secretariat, Puducherry - 605 001.

2.The Secretary (Finance), Chief Secretariat, Puducherry - 605 001.

3.The Secretary (Agriculture) - cum - Chairman, PASIC, Chief Secretariat, Puducherry - 605 001.

4.The Managing Director, PASIC, Agro House, Thattanchavadi, Puducherry - 605 009.

5.Thiru. B. Ramakrishnan @ Balagandhi Director, Agriculture, Department of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare, Puducherry - 605 001.

1/6

6.The Chairman, Puduvai Agro Products Producer Company Limited, No.1, First Floor, Mettu Street, Porayur, Puducherry - 605 101.

7.The Chairman, Puduvai Hi-Tech Farmers Producer Company Limited, No.29, 4th Cross, Thanthai Periyar Nagar, Puducherry - 605 005.

... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing respondents 1 to 3 to take appropriate action against 5th respondent and other erring officers of PASIC for having authorized distribution of Agriculture inputs through private dealers on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 08.02.2019. For Petitioner : M/s.R. Kalaiyarasi For Respondents : M/s.V. Usha, Additional Government Pleader (Puducherry) [R1 to R3 & R5] Mr.T.M. Naveen [R4] No Appearance [R6 & R7]

ORDER

The petitioner herein had given representation dated 08.02.2019 for a direction to the respondents 1 to 3 to take appropriate action against 5th respondent and other erring officers of PASIC for having authorized 2/6

distribution of Agriculture inputs through private dealers. Since the said representation was not considered, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

2. It is needless to point out that whenever representation of this nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon the respondents to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. As such, non-consideration of the representation by the Statutory Authority would amount to dereliction of duty and hence, this Court will be justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of Constitution of India and direct them to consider the same within a stipulated time.

3. Since the representation given by the petitioner dates back to the year 2019, it would be appropriate that the petitioner be granted liberty to give a fresh consolidated representation, with a consequential direction to the respondents herein, to consider the same.

4. In the light of the above observations, the petitioner is granted 3/6

liberty to give a fresh representation to the fourth respondent herein, ventilating his grievances. On receipt of the same, the fourth respondent shall consider it on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity to fifth respondent, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of the representation. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any of its views with regard to the merits of the claim made by the petitioner and that it is open to the concerned respondent to consider the same on its own merits.

5. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 05.12.2022 Speaking/Non-speaking Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Sni To 4/6