S.Ganamprakasam v. The Revenue Divisional
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 05.06.2018
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH W.P.(MD)No.11875 of 2018 1.S.Ganamprakasam 2.I.Thangaraji 3.P.Saroja 4.N.Subramanian 5.T.Muthuveeran 6.M.Arumugam 7.A.SabariDoss 8.P.Chellamal 9.A.Dhanapal 10.S.Sakthivel 11.M.Arumugam 12.A.Ashok Kumar 13.C.Singamuthu 14.P.Chelliah 15.S.Perumal 16.I.Arockiasamy 17.S.Annamari 18.M.Palanipandi 19.B.Seethalakshmi 20.S.Savariammal 21.K.Veluchamy 22.M.Manivel 23.A.Natrajan 24.R.Narayanakonar 25.K.Periyasamy 26.I.Victor Joseph 27.V.Arulandhu 28.G.Selvi 29.S.Anthoniammal 30.K.Appavau 31.S.Mariaselvam 32.K.Banumathi 33.R.Loorthumary 34.S.M.Palaniyandi 35.A.Sabaridass 36.A.Rajkumar 37.T.Innasimuthu 38.S.Chinniah 39.V.Arulandhu 40.D.Balasundaram 41.R.Sakthivel
42.M.Dhanapal ... Petitioners Vs.
1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Pudukottai.
2. The Thasildar, Kulathur Taluk, Pudukottai.
... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to consider petitioner's representation dated July 2017 regarding land assignment. For Petitioners : Ms.B.Asha For Respondents : Mr.V.Anand, Government Advocate
O R D E R
Mr.V.Anand learned Government Advocate, takes notice for the respondents. Notice.
2. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. 3.
It is the grievance of the petitioner that his representation regarding land assignment, has not been considered by the respondents 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 first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation on its own merits and take further action in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Such an exercise shall be done after giving due opportunity to the petitioner as well as to any other persons who may be interested
in the subject matter.
6. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(W) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To
1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Pudukottai.
2. The Thasildar, Kulathur Taluk, Pudukottai.
+ 1 cc TO Mrs.Thenmozhi Shivaperumal, Advocate in SR No. 66748 aav AE/SV/SAR2/13.06.2018/3P/4C W.P.(MD)No.11875 of 2018 05.06.2018