Madras High CourtWP(MD)/4015/2020disposed of

P.Rajagopal @ Raja Gopalan v. The Chief Engineer

2020-02-27Honourable Mrs Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:27.02.2020

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA P.Rajagopal @ Raja Gopalan ... Petitioner Vs.

1) The Chief Engineer, Highways (Project), Madurai 2

2) The Superintendent Engineer, High Ways(Project), Madurai - 2 ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to renew the petitioner's State Level First Class Government Contractor registration bearing Registration No.122/2007-2008 on the file of the 2nd respondent in the name of "P.Raja Gopal @ P.Raja Gopalan" by considering the application of the petitioner dated 01.11.2019 within a stipulated time that may be fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.S.C.Herold Singh For Respondents : Mr.Aaiyiram K.Selvakumar Additional Government Pleader ******

O R D E R

Mr.Aaiyiram K.Selvakumar, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the respondents.

2. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to 1/3

renew the petitioner's State Level First Class Government Contractor registration bearing Registration No.122/2007-2008 on the file of the 2nd respondent in the name of "P.Raja Gopal @ P.Raja Gopalan" by considering the application of the petitioner dated 01.11.2019 within a stipulated time that may be fixed by this Court.

4. The case of the petitioner is that, the original name of the petitioner is P.Raja Gopalan as per all records and he is commonly known as "P.Rajagopal". While registering as Contractor in High Ways(Projects), Madurai Circle, unfortunately in the solvency certificate, the name of the petitioner has been wrongly mentioned as P.Rajagopal instead of P.Rajagoplan. The petitioner, later applied before the second respondent to renew his registration, which was rejected by him stating that the petitioner has to apply afresh through proceedings dated 11.10.2019. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner made a representation before the 1st respondent on 01.11.2019. Till date, even the first respondent has not considered the representation of the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the present writ petition.

5. In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim made by the petitioner, the first respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 01.11.2019 and pass appropriate orders on the same, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AS) // True Copy // / /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) sts To:

1) The Chief Engineer, Highways (Project), Madurai 2 2/3

2) The Superintendent Engineer, High Ways(Project), Madurai - 2 +1 CC to Mr.S.C.HEROLD SINGH, Advocate ( SR-8755[F]dated 27/02/2020 ) +1 CC to SPL.GP ( SR-9141[F] dated 28/02/2020 ) Order made in 27.02.2020 VB(13.03.2020) 3P 5C 3/3