← Library
Madras High CourtWP/37060/2016disposed of

R.Anbalagan v. The Tahsildar

2016-10-24Honourable Mr Justice R.Subbiah2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 24.10.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH Writ Petition No.37060 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.31860 of 2016 R.Anbalagan ... Petitioner Vs The Tahsildar, Perur, Coimbatore District.

... Respondent Writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records connected with the proceedings issued in Na.Ka.4838/2016 A2 dated 18.10.2016 passed by the respondent and quash the same and consequently, direct the respondent to allow the petitioner to continue at Kumarapalayam Village.

For Petitioner :

Mr.S.Ilamvaludhi For Respondent :

Mr.K.Dhanajayan, Spl. Govt. Pleader.

ORDER

By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

2. The petitioner has come up with the present writ petition, challenging the proceedings of the respondent issued in Na.Ka.4838/2016 A2 dated 18.10.2016 and consequently, to direct the respondent to allow him to continue at Kumarapalayam Village.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that he joined as Village Assistant on 11.1.1985 at Puluvapatti Village and has been transferred to the present place of Kumarapalayam Village. He has completed 22 years of service in the present village. He has not given any room for any complaint and he is maintaining clean record. While so, by the impugned order, he has been https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

transferred from Kumarapalayam Village to Sithiraichavadi Village. The said order has been passed with an ulterior motive. Hence, challenging the same, the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition.

4. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader, who has taken notice on behalf of the respondent.

5. At the time of making his submissions, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that though the writ petition has been filed to quash the impugned order of the respondent, it would suffice, if a direction is issued to the respondent to consider the claim of the petitioner.

6. In view of the said submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Court directs the petitioner to give a detailed representation to the respondent along with a copy of this order, within a period of two days from the date receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of the same, the respondent is directed to consider the said representation seeking to allow the petitioner to continue at Kumarapalayam Village and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of three days thereafter. It is made clear that this Court is not expressing any opinion with the regard to the claim projected by the petitioner and it is for the respondent to consider his claim strictly on merits and in accordance with law. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CS V ) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar To The Tahsildar, Perur, Coimbatore District.

+1 cc to M/s.S.Ilamvaludhi, advocate,sr.60274. Mpi(co) krd 24/10 W.P.No.37060 of 2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/