← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/12993/2018disposed of

S.Sounderrajan, v. The Director General Of

2018-06-19Honourable Mr Justice R. Suresh Kumar2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.06.2018

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR W.P.(MD)No.12993 of 2018 S.Sounderrajan ... Petitioner -Vs1.The Director General of Police, State of Tamil Nadu, Chennai-4.

2.The Commissioner of Police, Trichy City, Trichy.

... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to consider petitioner's representation dated 19.04.2018.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Venkatesan For Respondents : Mr.M.Murugan Government Advocate

ORDER

The prayer sought for in this Writ Petition is for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 19.04.2018. 2.Mr.S.Venkatesan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.M.Murugan, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that, though a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the petitioner, subsequently, after considering the merits of the case, in the light of G.O.2 (D) No.245, Home (SC) Department, dated 04.08.2017, the further action initiated against the petitioner was dropped. In spite of the G.O.2(D)No.245, Home (SC) Department, having been issued, the petitioner's suspension dated 20.10.2015 has not so far been revoked and the petitioner has not been permitted to retire from service. Therefore, the petitioner had made a request on 19.04.2018 to the respondents to pass necessary orders for revoking the suspension and permitting the petitioner to retire from service, as he superannuated in the year 2015 itself. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that if the said representation of the petitioner is considered within a time frame, the petitioner would be satisfied. 5.I have heard Mr.M.Murugan, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents, who would submit that the said representation of the petitioner, dated 19.04.2018, would be considered on merits and in accordance with law and an order to that effect would be passed within a period that may be fixed by this Court.

6.Considering the said submission made by both sides, this Court is inclined to pass the following order:- "that the second respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 19.04.2018 with regard to his grievance of revocation of the suspension as well as for permitting him to retire from service in the light of G.O.2(D).No.245, Home (SC) Department, dated 04.08.2017 and pass orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. " 7.With this direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AD-I) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-IV) To 1.The Director General of Police, State of Tamil Nadu, Chennai-4.

2.The Commissioner of Police, Trichy City, Trichy.

+1CC to Mr.S.Venkatesan, Advocate, SR.No.68733 +1CC to the Special Government Pleader SR.No. 68853 W.P.(MD)No.12993 of 2018 19.06.2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ RMI ES/SKN/RSK/SAR 4/17.10.2018/2P/5C