S.Magesh, v. The Managing Director,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.07.2018

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH W.P.(MD) No.14921 of 2018 and W.M.P.(MD) No.13471 of 2018 S.Magesh ... Petitioner vs.

1. The Managing Director, Arasu Cable TV Corporation Limited, Dugar Towers, 34 (123) 6th Floor, Marshalls Road, Egmore, Chennai-600 008

2. The Special Tahsildar / Assistant Manager, Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable TV Corporation, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to receive the Arasu Cable signal in Boothapandi and erect a control at Boothapandi and provide Arasu Cable signal to the cable operators of Thovalai Taluk, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District, from Boothapandi Arasu Cable control room based on the petitioner's representation, dated 04.07.2018.

For Petitioner :

Mr.B.Prasanna Vinoth For Respondents :

Mr.Gunasekaran Standing Counsel

O R D E R

Mr.Gunasekaran, learned standing counsel, takes notice for the respondents.

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 dated 04.07.2018 seeking to receive Arasu Cable signal to Boothapandi, erect a control room at Boothapandi and provide Arasu Cable signal to the cable operators of Thovalai Taluk, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Nagarcoil, Kanyakumari District, from Boothapandi Arasu Cable control room, 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 dated 04.07.2018 on its own merits and take further action in accordance with law, within a period of four 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 the persons who may be interested in the subject matter.

6. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-I) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar (CS-1) + 1 CC TO Mr.B.PRASANNA VINOTH, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 72455 KRK TE/SKN/SAR-1 : 24/07/2018 : 2P/2C W.P.(MD) No.14921 of 2018 and W.M.P.(MD) No.13471 of 2018 11.07.2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/