K.Arumugam v. The State Of Tamil Nadu,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 26.06.2018
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATRUGHANA PUJAHARI W.P.No.15438 of 2018 1.K.Arumugam 2.S.Lakshmanan 3.R.Thennarasu 4.E.Balachandar 5.M.S.Samy 6.Paranjothi 7.Prakash 8.N.R.Amudha 9.Y.Ramya 10.D.Prabu 11.S.Balasubramani 12.V.Malathi 13.S.Ayyappan 14.D.Sridevi 15.R.Sumathy 16.G.Sasikumar 17.S.Srinivasan 18.Parimaladevi 19.C.Tamilalagan 20.D.Rekha 21.V.Vijayakumar 22.R.Periyamariammal 23.S.Tamizhselvi 24.Kanchana ..
Petitioners Vs
1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.
2. The Additional Chief Secretary/ Commissioner of Revenue Administration, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.
3. The District Collector,
4. The District Revenue Officer/ Collectorate, .. Respondents Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents 1 to 4 to grant the petitioners an opportunity of working as Revenue Inspectors immediately.
For Petitioners : M/s.Adithya Reddy For Respondents : Mr.V.Kadhirvelu, Spl.G.P.
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking for issuance of a mandamus to direct the respondents 1 to 4, to grant them an opportunity of working as Revenue Inspectors immediately.
2. Heard Mr.Adithya Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Mr.V.Kadhirvelu, learned Special Government Pleader, who accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 3.The grievance of the petitioners is that though they have been appointed as Assistants directly and their next promotion is to the post of Deputy Tahsildar but unless they had the requisite qualification of Firka Revenue Inspector, they will be dis-qualified from being considered for the aforesaid purpose. The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of their eligibility for being posted as Firka Revenue Inspector, they had not been posted. Therefore, they have made representation to the respondents to consider their posting for the post of Firka Revenue Inspector, so as to acquire the service qualification, which is the requirement for their promotion to the next cadre within the stipulated period. Such representation has been made on 30.05.2018.
4.No doubt in this case, no inaction can be attributed to the respondents inasmuch as the representation has been made recently, which enable the petitioners to seek for writ of mandamus. But considering the fact that the petitioners have filed the representation dated 30.05.2018 in this regard, and also the limited prayer made in this regard, without seeking a response of the respondents by counter affidavit, this Court dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondent no.3, to pass necessary orders on such representation of the
petitioners, if the same is pending, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5.However, it is made clear that the direction of this Court is confined to dispose of the representation pending and as such, the same should not be considered, as a mandate of this Court to dispose of the same in any particular manner. Furthermore, it is made clear that if there is no other legal impediment, the aforesaid representation may be disposed of, within the stipulated time. No costs.
s/d- Assistant Registrar(CS VIII) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar dn To
1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Additional Chief Secretary/ Commissioner of Revenue Administration, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.
3.The District Collector, 4.The District Revenue Officer/ Collectorate, Kancheepuram District, +1 CC to Adithy Reddy, Advocate sr 40445.
W.P.No.15438 of 2018 NRL(CO) SP(06/07/2018)