Indo Ply Ash Assoc. Rep.By Its v. The Chairman And Managing
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 28.09.2020
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA W.P.No.30228 of 2013 Indo Ply Ash Associates Rep by its Chairman N.Santhosh Kumar No.212/77-A, 1st Floor, Rajaji Nagar, Madhayankuttai Post, Mettur Dam, Mettur Taluk, Salem District.
... Petitioner Vs.
1. The Chairman and Managing Director, TANGEDCO, NPKRR Maaligai, Anna Salai, Cjemmao -2.
2. G.Natarajan, The Superintending Engineer / Mechanical, Mettur Termal Power Project Stage-III, Mettur Dam, Salem District.
3. Kalimuthu, Junior Engineer Mechanic, Mettur Thermal Power Project, Stage-III, Mettur Dam, Salem District.
...Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of mandamus, directing the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 30.10.2013 by holding enquiry with the misconduct of the Second Respondent G.Natarajan S.E/MECH.MTPP /Stage-III and Third respondent Kalimuthu J.E/M.MTPP/ Stage-III and their men and deal with them in accordance with law to secure the ends of justice For Petitioner : Mr.A.Ramesh For Respondent-1: Mr.N.Damodaran
ORDER
The prayer sought for in this writ petition is to direct the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 30.10.2013 by holding enquiry with the misconduct of the second respondent/Natarajan S.E/MECH.MTPP / Stage-III and third respondent/Kalimuthu J.E/M.MTPP/ Stage-III and their men and deal with them in accordance with law. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
2. Notice was served on the third respondent, but there is no representation on his behalf either in person or through counsel.
2.1. In view of the order this Court proposed to pass, though notice is yet to be served on the second respondent, no fresh notice is ordered to him.
3. The allegation of the petitioner is that the private respondents herein, who are the officials of the first respondent Corporation, in connivance with the other officials indulged in corrupt practices and thereby unlawfully enriching themselves causing huge loss to the TANGEDO. Hence, seeking to take departmental action against them, the petitioner submitted a representation to the first respondent on 30.10.2013 and rushed to this Court by filing this writ petition on 06.11.2013.
4. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court.
5. This Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the representation, directs the first respondent to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner on 30.10.2013 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and the private respondents, if he deems fit. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6. With the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS ) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To The Chairman and Managing Director, TANGEDCO, NPKRR Maaligai, Anna Salai, Chennai -2.
ajs(co) krd 28/10 W.P.No.30228 of 2013 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/