P.Krishnan, S/O.Mannu v. The Deputy Registrar Of

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 05.07.2018 Coram The Hon'ble Mr.Justice Satrughana Pujahari Writ Petition No. 16708 of 2018 P. Krishnan

...Petitioner

Vs.

1. The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Collectorate,Vengikal, Thiruvannamalai.

2. The Managing Director, Thiruvannamalai District Co-operative Press, Thiruvannamalai.

...Respondents

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the representation made by the petitioner dated 26.12.2017.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Dhinesh Kumar For Respondents : Mr.L.P.Shanmugasundaram Special Government Pleader

O R D E R

Heard Mr.R.Dhinesh Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.L.P.Shanmugasundaram, the learned Special Government Pleader, who accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. With consent of the learned counsel on either side, the Writ Petition is taken up for disposal. 2.

The grievance of the petitioner in this Writ Petition is that, though he has made a representation to the second respondent with a copy marked to the first respondent to grant him the appropriate salary, such representation has not been disposed of eventhough it was filed on 26.12.2017. Therefore, the petitioner has come to this Court seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to dispose of his representation in a time bound manner.

3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, since the respondents are guilty of inaction, a writ of mandamus be issued to them to dispose of the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law within a s stipulated period.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4.

The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submit that, if such representation is pending, the respondents shall have no objection to dispose of the same in accordance with law within a stipulated period. However, he particularly submits that the second respondent is the appropriate Authority for disposal of such representation. 5.

Regard been had to the facts and the submissions made, especially, the fact that the representation of the petitioner though filed wayback in the year 2017, but the same is stated to have not been disposed of, the appropriate Authority, i.e., the second respondent shall dispose of the same by a speaking order, but, 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 thereof to the petitioner. However, it is made clear that this Court has expressed no opinion on the merits of such representation of the petitioner in any manner. With the aforesaid order, this Writ Petition stands disposed of.No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar sd To

1. The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Collectorate,Vengikal, Thiruvannamalai.

+1cc to Mr.R.Dhineshkumar, Advocate, S.R.No.43670 +1cc to Mr.L.P.Shanmugasundaram, Advocate, S.R.No.44502 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.44611 Writ Petition No. 16708 of 2018 BM 25/07/2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/