Madras High CourtWP/2546/2017disposed of

M.Selvam v. The Secretary To

2017-02-02Honourable Mr Justice M. Sathyanarayanan3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02.02.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. SATHYANARAYANAN W.P. No. 2546 of 2017 Mr.M. Selvam ..Petitioner Vs.

The Secretary to Government, Health Department, (Administration), Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.

The Commissioner for Municipal Administration, Annex Building, 6th Floor, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.

The Commissioner, Rural Development and Local Administration, Panagal Building, Saidapet, Chennai - 600 015.

The Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner for Municipal Corporation, Salem Corporation, Salem.

The Corporation Health Officer, Office of the Corporation Health Officer, Salem Corporation, Salem.

Sanitary Inspector, Division -22 (Kottam), Suramangalam Ward Office, Salem Corporation, Salem.

..Respondents Prayer:

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing respondents 4 to 6 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 02.01.2017 with a direction to allocate the work as per his designated mandatory provision for Sanitary Supervisor in the respondents 4 to 6 Corporation limit within stipulated period of time.

For Petitioner ::

Mr.A. Thamizharasan For Respondents::

Mr.O. Selvam, Govt. Advocate for R1 to 3 Mrs.K. Bhuvaneswari for R4 to R6

O R D E R

By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

Mr.O. Selvam, learned Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 and Mrs.K. Bhuvaneswari, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondents 4 to 6. 3.

The petitioner, who is employed as a Sanitary Supervisor, in the service of the Salem City Municipal Corporation, on an earlier occasion, along with two others, had approached this Court by filing W.P. No. 36183 of 2007 praying for issue of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from demolishing their residential house and got an interim order on 29.02.2008 in M.P.No. 1 of 2007. The grievance now expressed by the petitioner is that the 6th respondent, from 01.11.2016, has not assigned any work to the petitioner. In this regard, the petitioner has submitted a representation dated 02.01.2017 to the Commissioner for Salem Corporation. Though the said representation was received on 03.01.2017, no orders have been passed and therefore, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition.

Heard Mr.A. Thamizharasan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.O. Selvam, learned Government Advocate for respondents 1 to 3 and Mrs.K. Bhuvaneswari, learned counsel for respondents 4 to 6.

Though the petitioner has prayed for a larger relief, this Court, in the light of the above facts and circumstances and without going into the merits of the claim projected by the petitioner, either in his representation or in the writ petition, directs the Commissioner, Salem Corporation, to consider the petitioner's representation dated 02.01.2017 and pass orders on the same, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the decision taken to the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

-s/dAssistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar

To 1.