G.T.N.Arts College v. The Director Of Collegiate Education
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.11.2018
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN W.P.No.30451 of 2018 G.T.N.Arts College, Rep.by its Secretary, Mr.V.Athinatanasamy.
...Petitioner
Dindigul-5 Vs 1.The Director of Collegiate Education, College Road, Chennai - 600 006.
2.The Regional Joint Director Collegiate Education, Madurai Region, Madurai.
...Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to sanction and approve 2 posts of Office Assistant to the petitioner's college based on the recommendation given by the 2nd respondent vide Na.Ka.No.8987/U2/2018, dated 22.10.2018 and the representation given by the petitioner dated 31.08.2018 within a time stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Ms.A.V.Bharathi for Mr.E.Martin Jayakumar For Respondents : Ms.P.Kavitha Government Advocate
ORDER
Ms.P.Kavitha, learned Government Advocate takes notice for the respondents. By consent of both parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
2. The petitioner has come up with this writ petition seeking a direction to the first respondent to sanction and approve 2 posts of Office Assistant to their college, based on
the recommendation given by the second respondent vide Na.Ka.No.8987/U2/2018, dated 22.10.2018, within a stipulated time as may be fixed by this Court, by considering their representation dated 31.08.2018.
3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the first respondent has sanctioned four posts in the cadre of Office Assistant to the petitioner-College. Hence, the petitioner has submitted a representation dated 31.08.2018 to the first respondent, requesting to sanction two posts in the cadre of Office Assistant. Though, the said proposal was recommended by the second respondent vide his proceedings dated 22.10.2018, the first respondent has not passed any order till date. Hence, the present writ petition.
4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents fairly submitted that the petitioner is stated to have submitted a representation on 31.08.2018, claiming the same relief as sought for herein and the same would be considered by the first respondent on merits and in accordance with law.
5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, directs the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 31.08.2018 and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law and also in the light of the recommendations given by the second respondent dated 22.10.2018 after affording due opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner as well as any other interested parties, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6. With the above direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS IV) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar ms
To 1.The Director of Collegiate Education, College Road, Chennai - 600 006.
2.The Regional Joint Director Collegiate Education, Madurai Region, Madurai.
+1cc to Mr.E.Martin Jayakumar, Advocate, S.R.No.79295 W.P.No.30451 of 2018 GSP(06/12/2018)