Madras High CourtWP(MD)/18225/2014disposed of

P.Murugeswari v. The Managing Director

2016-11-07Honourable Mr Justice V. Bharathidasan2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.11.2016

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN Writ Petition (MD) No.18225 of 2014 P.Murugeswari ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Managing Director, TamilNadu Arasu Cable T.V. corporation Ltd, No.11/12, Mankadu sami Street, Chennai - 600036.

2. The District Collector, Collectorate, Tuticorin Dt.

3. The Special Thasildar, Tamilnadu Arasu Cable T.V. Corporation, Collectorate, Tuticorin & District.

4. Karthikeyan ... 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 3rd respondent to provide cable T.V. connection to the petitioner as cable T.V. operator in LCO.No.46991 as per the representation made by this petitioner dated 11.9.2014 and to pass any such further or other order as this Honourable Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of this case.

For Petitioner : Ms.B. Rajesh Saravanan For Respondents : Mr.Abdul Saleem for Mr.S.Satheesh Kumar for R-1 & 2

ORDER

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking a direction, directing 3rd respondent to provide cable T.V.

connection to the petitioner as cable T.V. operator in LCO.No.46991 as per the representation made by this petitioner dated 11.9.2014 within the time frame fixed by this court. 2.According to the petitioner, he is a LCO (Local Cable TV Operator) in Illayarasanenthal, Tuticorin District, under the Arasu Cable TV Corporation. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has given a representation to the 3rd respondent on 11.9.2014, with regard to providing of uninterrupted cable TV connection to the petitioner. Sofar, the said representation has not been considered by the respondents. Hence, he has filed the present writ petition.

3.Mr.Abdul Saleem, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 3/Arasu Cable TV Corporation submitted that they are ready and willing to consider the petitioner's representation within a time limit prescribed by this Court. 4.In view of the above submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the 1 to 3rd respondents, the 1st and 3rd respondents are directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 11.9.2014, after giving opportunity to the petitioner as well as any rival claimant, if any, and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5.With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AE) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To +1 cc to M/s.B.Rajesh Saravanan, Advocate in SR.No.66556 vs CSL/SK-SKN/08.12.2016 :2P/2C W.P(MD)No.18225 of 2014 07.11.2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/