Madras High CourtWP(MD)/8872/2018disposed of

C.Anandan, v. The District Manager

2018-04-23Honourable Mr Justice M.S. Ramesh2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.04.2018

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH W.P.(MD) No.8872 of 2018 C.Anandan ... Petitioner vs.

1. The District Manager Tamilnadu Adidravidar Housing and Development Corporation (TAHDCO) Madurai

2. The Manager Canara Bank Chekkanoorani Branch Chekkanoorani Madurai District ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to disburse the loan amount of Rs.4,22,500/- as stipulated in the order vide Na.Ka.No.TAHDCO-2016-17-SEPY-MD-6, dated 29.09.2016 of the first respondent by taking into account of the petitioner's representation, dated 05.02.2018, within a stipulated time.

For Petitioner :

Mr.A.Rajini For Respondents :

Mr.J.Gunaseelan Muthiah Additional Government Pleader for R1 Mr.Pala Ramasamy for R2

O R D E R

Mr.J.Gunaseelan Muthiah, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for the first respondent and Mr.Pala Ramasamy, learned counsel takes notice for the second respondent - Bank.

2. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.

It is the grievance of the petitioner that his representation dated 05.02.2018 seeking to disburse the loan amount

of Rs.4,22,500/- as per the first respondent's order in Na.Ka.No.TAHDCO-2016-17-SEPY-MD-6, dated 29.09.2016, has not been considered by the second respondent till date and therefore, he has filed the present writ petition.

4. This Court has not expressed any of its view with regard to the merits of the representation made by the petitioner. It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made, the respondents are duty bound to consider the same in one way or the other. Non-consideration of the same would amount to dereliction of ordinary duties of their office and as such, this Court would be justified in invoking its powers conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct them to consider the petitioner's representation within a stipulated time.

5. In view of the limited prayer sought for in this writ petition, there shall be a direction to the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 05.02.2018 on its own merits and in the light of the first respondent's order in Na.Ka.No.TAHDCO-2016-17-SEPY-MD-6, dated 29.09.2016, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

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

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-II) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To:

The District Manager, Tamilnadu Adidravidar Housing and Development Corporation (TAHDCO), Madurai.

+ 1 CC TO Mr.A.RAJINI, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 63153 + 1 CC TO Mr.PALA RAMASAMY, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 63129 KRK TE/RSK/SAR-2 : 07/05/2018 : P/C W.P.(MD) No.8872 of 2018 23.04.2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/