Santhose Kumar.A v. The State Of Tamilnadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 01.02.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH A.Santhose Kumar

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Department of Transport, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

2.The District Collector, O/o. District Collector office Dindugul, Dindugul-624 004.

3.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd (TNSTC), Bye Pass Road, Madurai-625 010.

4.The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd (TNSTC), Dindugul Region, Bye Pass Road, Dindugul.

... Respondents P RAYER:

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Junior Assistant on compassionate ground with the respondent No.2 department or in any other suitable post within the time period stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy For R-1 and R-2 : Mr.M.Muniyasamy Additional Government Pleader For R-3 and R-4 : Mr.J.Senthilkumaraiah Standing Counsel

O R D E R

By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. 2.Since the petitioner's request to the respondents to appoint him as Junior Assistant on compassionate ground with the 1/3

second respondent Department or in any other suitable post was not considered, the Writ Petition has been filed. According to the petitioner, he has made a representation in this regard on 07.01.2021, which is still pending.

3. It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon the respondents to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. As such, nonconsideration of the representation by the Statutory Authority would amount to dereliction of duty and hence this Court will be justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of Constitution of India and direct them to consider the same within a stipulated time.

4. In the light of the above observations, it would be appropriate to direct the second respondent herein to consider the petitioner's representation dated 07.01.2021, within a stipulated time and thereby the ends of justice could be secured. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any of its view with regard to the merits of the claim of the petitioner and that it is open to the concerned respondent to consider the same on its own merits. 5.Accordingly, there shall be a direction to the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 07.01.2021, on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar () // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) cp NOTE:

In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned. 2/3

To 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Department of Transport, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

2.The District Collector, O/o. District Collector office Dindugul, Dindugul-624 004.

+1 CC to SPL GP ( SR-2843[F] dated 02/02/2021 ) +1 CC to Mr.T.LAJAPATHI ROY, Advocate ( SR-2925[F] dated 02/02/2021 ) 01.02.2021 VB (16.02.2021) 3P 5C 3/3