Madras High CourtWP/5564/2016disposed of

V.Nirmala, v. The Principal Secretary

2016-02-23Honourable Mr Justice M. Venugopal,Honourable Mr Justice Satish K. Agnihotri3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 23.02.2016

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI and THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL W.P. No.5564 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.4894 of 2016 V.Nirmala ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department, St. George Fort, Chennai - 9.

2. The Chairman and Secretary to Government, The State Level Scrutiny Committee, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 9.

3. Deputy Secretary to Government, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare (Cv-4) Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 9.

4. The Director of Prosecution, TNSC Board Complex, 2nd Floor, No.5, Kamarajar Salai, Chennai - 5.

5. The Deputy Director of Prosecution, Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram.

6. The District Collector, Chennai District, Chennai - 1.

7.The Additional Director General of Police, Economic Offences Wing, Head Quarters, Chennai.

... Respondents

Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the fourth and fifth respondents to dispose the representation dated 12.01.2016 within a time frame fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sabarish For Respondents : Mr.P.S.Sivashanmugha Sundaram, Special Government Pleader

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by SATISH K.AGNIHOTRI, J.) With the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 2.The petitioner seeks a direction to the authorities to consider her representation dated 12 January 2016 for grant of social status certificate.

3.It is the case of the petitioner that she belongs to Hindu Kurumans (ST) community and she was appointed as Assistant Public Prosecutor on 24 January 2013. The petitioner is presently working as Assistant Public Prosecutor Grade II, Thiruvallur and her appointment has not been confirmed due to the delay in scrutinising the community certificate by the State Level Scrutiny Committee. Therefore, the petitioner made a representation dated 31 March 2015, to which, a reply was sent to her, stating that it will be considered at the earliest. Since no action has been taken, the petitioner has given a further representation dated 12 January 2016. Finding no response, the petitioner has come up with this writ petition. 4.We have examined the facts. The Supreme Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil and another vs.

Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development and Others1, and a Division Bench of this Court, wherein, one of us (Satish K.Agnihotri, J. ) was a Member, in G.Venkitasamy Vs. The Chairman, State Level Scrutiny Committee, Chennai2 have already specified the time schedule to consider the application for issuance of social status certificate as per the guidelines and take a decision. The concerned authorities are directed to adhere to the time schedule and take a decision in accordance with the guidelines as specified in the aforestated cases, on its own merits and in accordance with law, at the earliest.

(1994) 6 SCC 241 2016-1-LW 289

5.With the aforestated observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// mmi Sub Assistant Registrar To