Puthumai Viyagappan.P v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29.03.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE P.Puthumai Viyagappan ... Petitioner Vs.
1. The District Collector, Tenkasi District, Tenkasi-627 811.
2. The Tahsildar, Veerakeralampudur Taluk, Veerakeralampudur-627 861, Tenkasi District.
3. The Regional Commissioner, Regional Provident Fund Office, Tirunelveli-627 007.
4. M/s.King Beedi Company Private Ltd, 95-A, Salaiyur Street, Lalugapuram, Melapalayam, Tirunelveli-627 005.
5. The Manager, State Bank of India, Surandai, Tenkasi- 627 859 ... Respondents P RAYER:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent herein to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 11.11.2021.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.John Vincent For Respondents : Mr.M.Lingadurai Special Government Pleader for R1 & R2 : Mr.K.Muralisankar for R3 : Mr.C.Karthik for R5
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed for a Mandamus seeking for a direction to the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 11.11.2021 requesting the second respondent to declare that Siluvaimuthu and Mariaselvam are one and the same person.
1/3
2.According to the petitioner, in some of the official records his name has been mentioned as Mariaselvam and in some others it has been mentioned as Siluvaimuthu. It is the case of the petitioner that the Village Administrative Officer has already issued a certificate declaring that Siluvaimuthu and Mariaselvam are one and the same. A similar certificate is sought for by the petitioner from the second respondent. The petitioner has given a representation dated 11.11.2021 to the second respondent for the said purpose. Since the said representation has not been considered till date, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.
3.Heard Mr.A.John Vincent, learned Counsel for the writ petitioner, Mr.M.Lingadurai, learned Special Government Pleader who accepts notice on behalf of the respondents 1 & 2, Mr.K.Muralisankar, learned Counsel who accepts notice on behalf of the third respondent and Mr.C.Karthik, who accepts notice on behalf of the fifth respondent.
4.On instructions, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that the second respondent is not a competent authority for the request made by the petitioner. The said statement is recorded.
5.However, the same is disputed by the petitioner and he would reiterate that the second respondent is the competent authority to issue a certificate as sought for by the petitioner in his representation dated 11.11.2021.
6.No prejudice would be caused to the second respondent if the representation of the petitioner dated 11.11.2021 is considered on merits and in accordance with law after affording a fair hearing to the petitioner including granting him the right of personal hearing. 7.For the foregoing reasons, this Court directs the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 11.11.2021 and pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law after affording a fair hearing to the petitioner including granting him the right of personal hearing within a period of twelve [12] weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8.With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AD-I) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) 2/3
MR To
1. The District Collector, Tenkasi District, Tenkasi-627 811.
2. The Tahsildar, Veerakeralampudur Taluk, Veerakeralampudur-627 861, Tenkasi District.
+1 CC to M/s.K.MURALI SANKAR, Advocate ( SR-15267[F] dated 30/03/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.A.JOHN VINCENT, Advocate ( SR-15382[F] dated 30/03/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-15667[F] dated 31/03/2022 ) 29.03.2022 SVN(CO) KB(07.04.2022) 3P 6C 3/3