← Library
Madras High CourtWP/25905/2019disposed of

D.Sasikumar v. The Director,

2019-09-04Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 04.09.2019

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P.Nos.25905 and 25908 of 2019 D.Sasikumar ... Petitioner in W.P.No.25905/2019 V.Kalaiarasi ... Petitioner in W.P.No.25908/2019 Vs.

1.The Director, Elementary Education, DPI Campus, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 006.

2.The Chief Elementary Education Officer, Erode District, Erode.

... Respondents in both W.Ps.

Common Prayer:

Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to dispose the representation dated 06.05.2019 submitted by the petitioner within a time frame fixed by this Hon'ble Court. For Petitioners : Mr.N.G.R.Prasad for M/s.Row & Reddy For Respondents : Ms.V.Annalakshmi Government Advocate C O M M O N O R D E R The petitioners have filed these writ petitions seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to dispose the representation dated 06.05.2019 submitted by the petitioner within a time frame fixed by this Court. 2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

3.The petitioners are qualified for promotion to the post of BT Assistant, however, they were not promoted. When the petitioners enquired about the same, they came to know that the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

vacancies were filled by way of administrative transfers. Thereafter, after some litigations, the petitioners were promoted to the post of B.T.Assistants with effect from 25.04.2019 and not from the date on which their immediate senior got promotion. Thereafter, the petitioners made detailed representation to the respondents to fix their seniority from the date on which they would have been promoted as per their original seniority. However, the same were not considered. Hence, these writ petitions.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that it would suffice, if this Court issues direction to the respondents to consider the petitioners representation within a reasonable time.

5.The learned Government Advocate also conceded the request made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. 6.Considering the limited request made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, I am inclined to issue direction to the respondents to consider the representation made by the petitioners, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

7.The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True copy// Sub Assistant Registrar pri To 1.The Director, Elementary Education, DPI Campus, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 006.

2.The Chief Elementary Education Officer, Erode District, Erode.

W.P.Nos.25905 and 25908 of 2019 PA(CO) GMY(11/10/2019) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/