Antony Praveen David v. The Director General Of Police
W.P.(MD)No.8832 of 2021 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 30.04.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI W.P.(MD)No.8832 of 2021 Antony Praveen David ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Director General of Police, Tamilnadu, Chennai 600 004.
2.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.
... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to pass appropriate orders on the second respondent's recommendation letter dated 21.05.2013 within a specified time frame that may be fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Ponnaiah For Respondents : Mr.C.Ramar Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
This writ petition is filed seeking for a mandamus, directing the first respondent to pass appropriate orders on the recommendation letter dated 21.05.2013 of the second respondent within a specified time frame that may be fixed by this Court. 2.Mr.C.Ramar, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.
3. According to the petitioner, his father Amalraj Manoharan was serving as Head Constable No.1595 in Ramanathapuram District and he died on 22.06.2009 while he was in service. His mother, on behalf of the petitioner applied to the second respondent/ Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram on 10.07.2009 for compassionate appointment. But the second respondent vide his https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2
W.P.(MD)No.8832 of 2021 endorsement in C.No.A4/17331/2009, dated 19.06.2014, replied that the petitioner has completed only 16 years of age and was ineligible for appointment. Thereafter, second respndent vide his letter C.No.A4/17331/2009 dated 21.05.2013 addressed to the first respondent/ Director General of Police, Chennai recommended his name for compassionate appointment. Since the first respondent has not passed any orders on the recommendation of the second respondent, the petitioner has come out with the present writ petition.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without deciding the issue on merits, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 20.04.2021 taking into consideration the recommendation of the second respondent, dated 21.05.2013, in proceedings No.C.No.A4/17331/2009 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AE) //True copy// / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar AM To 1.The Director General of Police, Tamilnadu, Chennai 600 004.
2.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District, Ramanathapuram.
+2 CC to Mr.PONNIAH, Advocate ( SR-18133[F] dated 30/04/2021 ) +1CC to THE SPECIA GOVERNMENT PLEADER(SR-18411[F] dated 03/05/2021) Order made in W.P.(MD)No.8832 of 2021 30.04.2021 KUN(CO) SRS/04.06.2021/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2