Madras High CourtWP/348/2018disposed of

M.Thirugnanasambandham, v. The Secretary To The Govt.,

2020-03-16Honourable Mr Justice N. Anand Venkatesh3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 16.03.2020

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH W.P No.348 of 2018 and W.M.P No.406 of 2018 M.Thirugnanasambandham Petitioner vs.

1. The Secretary to Government, St. George Fort, Chennai.

2. The Transport Commissioner, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.

3. The Department of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Greenways Road, Chennai - 600 028.

4. The Deputy Transport Commissioner, No.271/2, Karur Main Road, Luckapuram Post, Erode, Erode District.

5. The Regional Transport Officer, Taluk Transport Office, Tiruchengode Taluk, Namakkal District.

Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the 5th respondent in, by adopting social boycott by non cooperating in performing their official duties, in those documents submitted by the petitioner, and by not permitting the petitioner from performing his duties as per the Statute, by protecting his fundamental rights enshrined in The Constitution of India.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Sundaravadhanan For Respondents: Mr.E.Balamurugan Special Government Pleader

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 5th respondent not to prevent the petitioner from performing his duties on behalf of the Insurance Company.

2.The case of the petitioner is that he is an insurance agent and he is taking care of the insurance policy of the vehicles and therefore, he has been authorized to represent the Insurance Company before the 5th respondent office. The grievance of the petitioner is that a false criminal complaint was given against the petitioner and consequently the petitioner was prevented from entering into the office of the 5th respondent. The petitioner, therefore, made a representation to the 4th respondent in this regard. Since the same was not considered, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court seeking for appropriate directions.

3.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 4.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances, there shall be a direction to the 4th respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 23.11.2017 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The petitioner is directed to make a fresh representation to the 4th respondent along with a copy of the representation dated 23.11.2017 and a copy of this order.

5.This writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No Costs.

-s/d- Assistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar ssr To