← Library
Madras High CourtWP/19124/2016disposed of

T.Vijayaraj, S/O.Thangavel, v. The Sub Collector,

2016-06-07Honourable Mr Justice B. Rajendran2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 07.06.2016

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN WP.No. 19124/2016 T.Vijayaraj ..Petitioner Vs 1.The Sub-Collector Gobichettipalayam Erode District.

2.The Tahsildar Taluk Office Bhavani.

..Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1st respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation, dated 27.02.2016, and to pass further orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

For Petitioner :

Mr.S.Vijayakumar For Respondents :

Mr.P.Chinnadurai Government Advocate

O R D E R

By consent, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. The petitioner entered into service in the Revenue Department as Village Administrative Officer, on 08.02.2013. A trap was laid by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Department, on 12.01.2016, for the alleged demand and acceptance of bribe, on the complaint given by one N.Karuppa Gounder. Thereafter, the petitioner was placed under suspension by the 1st respondent, on 13.01.2016. The grievance of the petitioner is that though, F.I.R. was registered on 11.01.2016 under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, no charge sheet has been filed and that the order of suspension was not reviewed by the 1st respondent. In this regard, the petitioner has made a representation to the 1st respondent, on 27.02.2016. Since, no order is passed by the 1st respondent, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition.

3. Mr.S.Vijayakumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner would be satisfied, if the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

representation of the petitioner, dated 27.02.2016, is directed to be considered by the 1st respondent and appropriate orders are passed.

4. Mr.P.Chinnadurai, the learned Government Advocate, who takes notice for the respondents, would submit that he has got no objection in directing the 1st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 27.02.2016 and to pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, within a time frame.

5. Considering the submissions made on either side and also the limited scope of prayer sought for by the petitioner, this Court, without going into the merits of the claim made by the petitioner, directs the 1st respondent to consider the represention of the petitioner, dated 27.02.2016 and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to the merits of the claim made by the petitioner.

6. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CS IV ) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar paa To 1.The Sub-Collector Gobichettipalayam Erode District.

2.The Tahsildar Taluk Office Bhavani.

1 cc to Government Pleader, Sr. 30491 1 cc to Mr.S.S. Vijayakumar, Advocate, Sr. 30120 W.P.No.19124/2016 NR (CO) kk 16/6 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/