Amudha, v. State Rep. By Its
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 10.07.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM WP.No.11839/2017 Amudha ..
Petitioner
Versus
1. State Rep. by its Secretary for Home, Government of Tamil Nadu, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009
2. The Director, Adidravidar and Tribal Welfare, Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai 600 005
3. The District Collector,
4. The Superintendent of Police,
5. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
6. The District Employment Officer,
7. The District Welfare Officer, Adidravidar and Tribal Welfare, Nagapattinam District
8. The Tahsildar,
9. The Block Development Officer, ..
Respondents
Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 16.03.2017 requesting for any job opportunity in Government Department.
For Petitioner :
M/s.D.Parvendan For Respondent :
Mr.K.Dhananjayan, Special Government Pleader
ORDER
The basis on which the writ petitioner moved this writ pettition is that her husband was assassinated by a group of extremists in front of the police station.
2.
In this regard, a crime was registered and there was a huge demonstration by the local people and a peace committee was organised by the competent authorities and the Government authorities, in order to pacify the local people and to provide certain compensation to the victims assured to give employment to the victims of the family.
3.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner urged this Court that the Government officials had promised to provide the government employment to all the victims including the writ petitioner. The promise was not only given orally but also in writing in which the Revenue Divisional Officer, Myiladudurai and Tahsildhar, Sirzhgali are the parties. Such being the promise provided in writing to the writ petitioner and other victims, it is the duty of the officials to see that such promise are duly complied with. When the husband of the writ petitioner died due to sudden attack before the police station by the extremists and when the police was unable to prevent such harsh attack in front of the police station, it is for the State to provide appropriate remedy to the victims and rightly so, the promise was also given to the victim for providing employment in any one of the suitable post according to the qualification of the victims.
4.
In the case on hand, the petitioner has made representation several times and finally on 16.03.2017. No decision is taken in this regard and it is for the authorities to consider without any further delay in this matter. Since the family will be in indigent circumstances and as per the promise, it is the duty of the officials to provide remedy to these kind of victims.
5.
In this view of the matter, the respondents are directed to consider the representation submitted by the writ petitioner on 16 March 2017 and pass order on merits in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
6.
Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. However, there is no order as to costs.
Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CS VIII) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar rka/sji To
1. State Rep. by its Secretary for Home, Government of Tamil Nadu, Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009
2. The Director, Adidravidar and Tribal Welfare, Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai 600 005
3. The District Collector,
4. The Superintendent of Police,
5. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
6. The District Employment Officer,
7. The District Welfare Officer, Adidravidar and Tribal Welfare Nagapattinam District
8. The Tahsildar,
9. The Block Development Officer,
10. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Myladuthurai.
+ 1 cc to M/s.Mr.D.Parventhan, Advocate,SR.48357 + 1 cc to The Govt.Pleader, SR.48672 WP.No.11839/2017 GP(CO) NR 26/07/2017