K.K.Natarajan v. The Director

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 06.04.2015

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T. MATHIVANAN Writ Appeal No.1543 of 2013 K.K. Natarajan ...Appellant/Petitioner vs.

1. The Director Adi Dravidar Welfare Department Ezhilagam, Chennai-5.

2. The District Collector Chennai District Chennai-600 001.

3. The District Welfare Officer O/o, The District Collector Chennai-600 001.

...Respondents/Respondents

Prayer: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 22.01.2013 in W.P.No.1666/2013 on the file of this Court.

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 7.8.2008 and thereby direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to continue the service as Cook in the Government College Hostel at Perambur, Chennai -600 012 and pay back all the service benefits from 3.4.2000. For petitioner :

Mr.M.V. Muralidaran For respondents :

Mrs.A.Srijayanthi Spl. G.P.

J U D G M E N T

[Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.Jaichandren, J.] Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties concerned.

2. This appeal has been filed against the order of the learned Single Judge, dated 22.01.2013, made in W.P.No.1666 of 2013, rejecting the request of the writ petitioner, the appellant herein, to direct the respondents in the writ petition, to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 07.08.2008, and to pass appropriate orders thereon.

3. The petitioner had made a representation, on 07.08.2008, claiming that he is entitled to continue in service, as a Cook, in the Government College Hostel, at Perambur, Chennai, and for all service benefits, including the monetary benefits, from 3.4.2000. However, the learned Single Judge had dismissed the writ petition, stating that the petitioner is not entitled to the relief prayed for by him in the writ petition.

4. At this stage of the hearing of the Writ Appeal, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that the third respondent would consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 07.08.2008, and dispose of the same, within a period of eight weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of the order passed by this Court.

5. In view of such submission made by the learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents, we do not find any reason to consider the merits of the other aspects raised in the writ appeal.

6. In such circumstances, we find no further orders are necessary in the present writ appeal. Hence, the writ appeal, stands closed. No costs.

Sd/- Deputy Registrar(J) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

Tr/ To

1. The Director Adi Dravidar Welfare Department Ezhilagam Chennai-5.

2. The District Collector Chennai District Chennai-600 001.

3. The District Welfare Officer O/o, The District Collector Chennai-600 001.

1 CC to Mr.M.V. Muralidaran, Advocate SR.No. 18887 1 CC to the Government Pleader, SR.No. 18996 Writ Appeal No.1543 of 2013 UG (CO) PSI (13.05.2015)