V.Nandagopalan v. The Secretary

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 19.12.2017 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.No.32995 of 2017 V.Nandagopalan ... Petitioner Vs.

The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commision, Frozer Bridge Road, VOC Nagar, Part Town, Chennai-600 003.

... Respondent Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent to dispose of the representation dated 15.09.2016 & 20.10.2016 given by the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Krishnamurthy For Respondent : Mrs.Niraimathi, Standing Counsel for TNPSC

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to direct the respondent to dispose of his representations dated 15.09.2016 & 20.10.2016.

2.The petitioner had participated in the Combined Subordinate Services Examination-1 conducted by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (TNPSC) for the recruitment to various posts. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a Demand Draft dated 09.04.2001 for a sum of Rs.75/- bearing No.826253, drawn in favour of The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Chennai, payable at State Bank of India, Service Branch, was also sent by the petitioner as required by the Secretary, TNPSC. Thereafter, the petitioner has also written the examination for the year 1996 to 1999. But, there was no subsequent development. The petitioner wanted to know the details of the selection of the direct recruitments. Hence, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

he has sent a representation on 15.09.2016 to the respondent. Finding no response, the petitioner has again sent another representation on 20.10.2016. Since there is no reply from the respondents, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition.

3.This court is unable to entertain this writ petition as the petitioner has committed huge lapse on his part. When he has written the examination during the year 1996 to 1999, if there was no response with regard to his result, he should have made representation immediately then and there, in the year 1996, which has not been done by the petitioner. In view of the huge lapse on the part of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition.

Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Asst.Registrar (J) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar ssv To The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commision, Frozer Bridge Road, VOC Nagar, Part Toown, Chennai-600 003.

+2cc to Mr.M.Krishnamurthy, Advocate sr.no.90403 W.P.No.32995 of 2017 nr 19/01/2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/