← Library
Madras High CourtWP/5925/2017disposed of

T.Lakshmanan, v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,

2017-03-10Honourable Mr Justice T.Raja2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10.03.2017

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P. No.5925 of 2017 T. Lakshmanan Petitioner vs.

The State of Tamil Nadu represented by its Secretary Municipal Administration & Water Supply Department Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009 The Commissioner of Municipal Administration "Ezhilagam Complex"

Chepauk, Chennai 600 005 Salem Corporation represented by its Commissioner Salem 636 001 Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith regularise the services of the petitioner in the third respondent Corporation with effect from 23.02.2006 as per the provisions of G.O. Ms.No.21, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department (M.C. 3) dated 23.02.2006 by considering and passing orders on the petitioner's last representation dated 21.02.2017. For petitioner :

Mr. K. Selvaraj For RR 1 & 2 :

Mr. K. Thangapandi, Govt. Advocate For R3 :

Ms. K. Bhuvaneswari, Standing Counsel

ORDER

Mr.K.Thangapandi, learned Government Advocate, accepts notice for respondents 1 and 2. Ms.K.Bhuvaneswari, learned Standing Counsel, accepts notice for the third respondent. With consent, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2.The petitioner joined as Pump Operator in the third respondentCorporation on 17.03.1986. Even after putting in three decades of service, he has not been given the benefit of regularisation, despite his repeated representations in this regard. Meanwhile, acting on one of his representations dated 19.10.2010, the third respondent informed the petitioner vide letter dated 25.11.2010 that he shall be paid with suitable scale of pay after the Government accords permission in this regard. However, as there has been no response since then, despite his subsequent representation dated 21.02.2017 addressed to the second respondent, the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition seeking the aforesaid relief.

3.In view of the limited scope of the relief sought by the petitioner, without going into the merits of the case, this Court directs the respondents 1 and 2 to consider and pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's representation dated 21.02.2017, on its own merits and in accordance with law, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

With the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. Costs made easy.

-s/dAssistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar cad To The Secretary Municipal Administration & Water Supply Department Government of Tamil Nadu, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009 The Commissioner of Municipal Administration "Ezhilagam Complex"

Chepauk, Chennai 600 005 The Commissioner Salem Corporation, Salem 636 001 +1 CC to Mr.K.Selvaraj, Advocate Sr.No.15449 +1 CC to Government Pleader, High Court, Chennai Sr.No.15503 W.P. No.5925 of 2017 RK(CO) VS(22.03.2017) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/