← Library
Madras High CourtWP/30861/2012dismissed as infructuous

Venkatesappa, v. The District Collector

2021-03-09Honourable Mr Justice S.S. Sundar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 09.03.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR W.P.No.30861 of 2012 Venkatesappa ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector Krishnagiri District Krishnagiri 2.The Special Tahsildar SIPCOT Industrial Complex Hosur Taluk Krishnagiri District 3.State Industries Promotion Corporation of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT) Limited Rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director No.19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road Egmore, Chennai - 600 008 (R3 impleaded as per order dated 15.4.2013 in M.P. No.1 of 2013 in W.P. No.30861/12) ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents herein to dispose of the representation dated 05.07.2012 within the time as stipulated by this Hon'ble court.

For Petitioner :

Mr.P.Subba Reddy For R1 & R2 :

Mr.M.Elumalai Additional Government Pleader For R3 :

Mr.J.D.Srikanth Varma

O R D E R

This writ petition is filed for issuing a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 05.07.2012.

2. Though the prayer is simple and this court is inclined to allow the writ petition with a direction to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner, the learned Additional Government Pleader, appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2, on instructions, states that the representation of the petitioner, was duly considered and an order was passed on 22.03.2013 itself. Hence, this court feels that no further adjudication is required in this matter. Recording the fact that the representation of the petitioner is disposed of by the respondents, this writ petition is closed as infructuous. No costs.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is unable to confirm whether the order passed by the respondents, after considering the representation of the petitioner, is served on the petitioner or not. He is also handicapped, because the petitioner is no more and he could not contact the legal heirs of the petitioner. In such circumstances, the learned Additional Government Pleader, is directed to serve a copy of the order that was passed in March 2013, on the legal heirs of the petitioner. The respondents shall ensure service of order copy on petitioner's legal heirs, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar Asr To 1.The District Collector, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri.

2.The Special Tahsildar, SIPCOT Industrial Complex, Hosur Taluk, Krishnagiri District.

3.The Chairman and Managing Director, State Industries Promotion Corporation of Tamil Nadu (SIPCOT) Limited, No.19-A, Rukmani Lakshmipathy Road Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.

+1cc to Mr.P.Subba Reddy, Advocate Sr.14927 +1cc to the Government Pleader Sr.15197 W.P.No.30861 of 2012 gsm[co] srg 29/03/2021