P.Munusamy, S/O.Padmanaban, v. The Assistant Engineer,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 24.03.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR Writ Petition No.6777 of 2012 P.Munusamy ...
Petitioner -Vs1.The Assistant Engineer Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Gingee Taluk, Villupuram District.
2.The Junior Engineer Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Gingee Taluk, Villupuram District.
3.The District Collector Villupuram, Villupuram District.
...
Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider and pass orders on petitioner representation dated 19.12.2011.
For Petitioners :
Mr.N.Edwin Jeyakumar For Respondents :
Mr.Fakkir Mohideen - for RR 1 & 2 Mr.K.Magesh, Special Government Pleader for R3
O R D E R
The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider and pass orders on petitioner representation dated 19.12.2011.
2. The petitioner claims that he was working as Daily Wager in the respondent Board from 20.02.2003 for five years continuously upto 2008 and thereafter he was suddenly disengaged by the respondents and therefore, in order to get further engagement or permanent appointment, the petitioner had given several representations and last such representation was given on 19.12.2011 to the second respondent, and since the same was not considered by the respondents, the petitioner has filed this writ petition with the aforesaid prayer. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, who reiterated the aforesaid facts and Mr.Fakkir Mohideen, learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.K.Magesh, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the third respondent.
4. Mr.Fakkir Mohideen, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that, the claim made by the petitioner has to be verified and only thereafter, it can be decided whether the request of the petitioner made through his representation dated 19.12.2011 can be considered or not.
5. Be that as it may.
The petitioner made a representation on 19.12.2011 and sent the same through registered post to the respondents. On receipt of the same, the first and second respondents should have disposed of the same immediately or within a reasonable time. As the same has not been disposed of, the petitioner has been driven to file this writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus as prayed for.
6. In view of the innocuous nature of the prayer, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition with the following order. That there shall be a direction to the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 19.12.2011 and dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
7. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar KST To 1.The Assistant Engineer Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Gingee Taluk, Villupuram District.
2.The Junior Engineer Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Gingee Taluk, Villupuram District.
3.The District Collector Villupuram, Villupuram District.
+1cc to Mr.N.Edwin Jeyakumar , Advocate SR.No. 19062 +1 cc to Government Pleader Sr.No. 19353 W.P.No.6777 of 2012 PL CO A.SK(09.04.2021) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/