V.Govindarajan, v. The Inspector General Of

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 21.04.2015

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M. SATHYANARAYANAN W.P. No. 11531 of 2015 V. Govindarajan ..Petitioner Vs.

1.

The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Chennai - 28.

2.

The District Registrar, (Administration), Namakkal.

..Respondents Prayer:

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to renew the Document Writer's Licence of the petitioner in A/157/95/NMK so as to enable the petitioner to practice the profession of preparing documents.

For Petitioner ::

Mr.N. Suresh For Respondents::

Mrs.P. Rajalakshmi, Govt. Advocate

O R D E R

By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

2.

The petitioner claims that he was originally a Document Writer by profession right from the year 1987 with licence No. A10/NMK/87 and thereafter, it was renewed in the year 1995 in A/157/95/NMK. Subsequently, the petitioner was selected and appointed as a Village Administrative Officer in the year 2000 and after his retirement on 31.8.2014, he applied to the 2nd respondent for renewal of his licence by paying necessary charges and there was inter-departmental communication as to the renewal of licence of the petitioner. The petitioner challenged the same by filing W.P. No. 1460 of 2015 and this Court, by order dated 22.01.2015, directed the 1st respondent, namely, the Inspector General of Registration to issue appropriate clarification to the 2nd respondent as sought for by him in his proceedings dated 08.12.2014

within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that order. Thereafter, the 1st respondent, vide letter in Na.Ka. No. 56789/S1/2014 dated 10.02.2015, has clarified that subject to Rule 10(1) of Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, licence can be given to the petitioner. However, renewal of licence sought by the petitioner was not granted and in this regard, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 26.03.2015 to the 1st respondent and though, it was acknowleged, he was not favoured with any response and therefore, came forward to file this writ petition. 3.

Mr. N. Suresh, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated 22.01.2015 passed in W.P. No. 1460 of 2015 as well as the aforesaid proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 10.02.2015 and submitted that in the light of the same, the 1st respondent may be directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner, within a stipulated time.

4.

Heard the submissions of Mrs.P. Rajalakshmi, learned Government Advocate, who accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

5.

Though the petitioner has prayed for a larger relief, this Court, in the light of the facts and circumstances, directs the 1st respondent to take into consideration, the order passed by this Court dated 22.01.2015 in W.P. No. 1460 of 2015 as well as his proceedings dated 10.02.2015 in Na.Ka.No. 56789/S1/2014, addressed to the 2nd respondent and pass orders, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, in any event, not later than 6 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the decision taken to the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar nv

To 1.

The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Chennai - 28.

2.

The District Registrar, (Administration), Namakkal.

+ 1 cc to Mr.N. Suresh, Advocate SR.21732 + 1 cc Government Pleader Sr.21815 KU(CO) EU 22.05.2015 W.P. No. 11531 of 2015