← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/7235/2025disposed of

G.Arumugam v. The District Collector

2025-03-18Honourable Mr. Justice Battu Devanand6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND G.Arumugam ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

2.The Executive Engineer, TWAD Board, Sivagangai -Ramnad Circle- Cum - Project Maintenance Circle, Allur - Panangadi Road, Sivagangai.

3.The Executive Engineer, TWAD Board, Rural Water Supply Division, Allur - Panangadi Road, Sivagangai - 630 561.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent i.e., the Executive Engineer, TWAD Board, Rural Water Supply Division, Sivagangai to carry out the orders of the District Collector, Sivagangai made in her letter 1/6

No.Na.Ka.P5/22079/2024 dated 17.12.2024, within a specified time frame that may be fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Visvalingam For R1 : Mr.P.Subbaraj Special Government Pleader For R2 & R3 : Mr.R.Satheesh Standing Counsel

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to carry out the orders of the District Collector, Sivagangai, dated 17.12.2024, within a specified time frame fixed by this Court.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he was worked as Fitter Grade - II in the second and third board and retired from service on 31.05.2022. He submitted a representation dated 07.10.2024 to the first respondent with regard to enter his service particulars in his service register for the period he worked as daily wage from 01.12.1992 to 25.10.1995 in the TWAD board. After considering the entire issue, the first respondent directed the third respondent to enter the details in the service register of the individual in view of the fact that the TWAD board paid salary to the petitioner for the period from 01.12.1992 to 2/6

25.10.1995. The grievance of the petitioner is that the direction of the first respondent has not been carried out by the third respondent. Aggrieved by the inaction of the third respondent in carrying out the direction of the first respondent, the present writ petition has been filed.

3. The learned Special Government Pleader for the first respondent would submit that the first respondent being the District Magistrate considered the representation of the petitioner, dated 07.10.2024 and on examination of the entire issue instructed the third respondent board to enter the details in the service register of the petitioner for the period from 01.12.1992 to 25.10.1995.

4. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 2 and 3 would submit that the first respondent has no authority to issue such instructions to the third respondent and if the petitioner is having any grievance with the TWAD board, he has to approach the TWAD board by making proper representation for redressal of his grievance. In the present case, the petitioner did not submit any representation to the TWAD board to consider his request. 3/6

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the respective learned counsels, as rightly pointed out by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 2 and 3 that the Managing Director of the TWAD board is the competent authority to consider the request of the petitioner to enter the service particulars of the petitioner in his service register for the period from 01.12.1992 to 25.10.1995, this Court intends to dispose of this writ petition at the stage of admission with the consent of both parties without going into the merits of the case by granting liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation to the Managing Director of the TWAD board to meet the ends of justice.

6. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation to the Managing Director of the TWAD board requesting to enter the details of his service rendered from 01.12.1992 to 25.10.1995 in the TWAD board within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the same, the Managing Director of the TWAD board shall consider the representation of the petitioner taking into consideration of the fact that the petitioner was paid salary for period from 01.12.1992 to 25.10.1995 as per the order of the Labour Court, Madurai in Case 4/6

No.150/1993, dated 14.03.1996, which was confirmed by this Court subsequently, within a period of four weeks thereafter. No costs.

18.03.2025 NCC:yes/no Index:yes/no Internet:yes/no Sn To:

1.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

2.The Executive Engineer, TWAD Board, Sivagangai -Ramnad Circle- Cum - Project Maintenance Circle, Allur - Panangadi Road, Sivagangai.

3.The Executive Engineer, TWAD Board, Rural Water Supply Division, Allur - Panangadi Road, Sivagangai - 630 561.

5/6

BATTU DEVANAND , J.

Sn 18.03.2025 6/6