Madras High CourtWP(MD)/10545/2017disposed of

Ramesh, v. The Managing Director,

2017-06-07Honourable Mr Justice K. Kalyanasundaram4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED 07.06.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM W.P(MD)No.10545 of 2017 Ramesh ..Petitioner Vs 1.The Managing Director, 34/123, 6th Floor, Dugar Tower, Marshal Road, Egmore, Chennai.

2.The District Collector, 3.The Special Tahsildar/Deputy Manager, 4.P.Manikandan ..Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to appoint a person in charge to the Dindugul Cable TV Operators Control Room in respect of Tamizhaga Arasu Cable TV Corporation on the basis of the representation dated 30.1.2017.

For Petitioner : M/s.R.G.Shankar Ganesh For Respondent-1 : Mr.S.Satish Kumar Addl..Govt.Pleader For Respondents : Mr.A.Muthukaruppan 2 and 3 Addl.Govt.Pleader

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to appoint a person in charge to the Dindugul Cable TV Operators Control Room in respect of Tamizhaga Arasu Cable TV Corporation on the basis of the representation dated 30.1.2017.

2.Mr.S.Satheesh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the first respondent and Mr.A.Muthukaruppan, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents 2 and 3.

3.By consent of both parties, the main Writ Petition is taken up for disposal, at the admission stage itself. 4.The grievance of the Petitioner is that the fourth respondent herein was in-charge of Dindigul Cable TV Operators Control Room and he was removed from service based on the representation given by the third respondent and subsequently the key of the Control Room is handed over to the third respondent. However, the respondents 1 to 3 have not appointed a new person to manage the Control Room. In this regard, the Petitioner and others submitted a representation on 30.1.2017. Since the same has not been considered so far, the Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition for the relief stated supra. 5.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court directs the first respondent to consider the representation of the Petitioner, dated 30.1.2017 on merits and in accordance with law and pass orders on the same, after giving notice to the Petitioner and other interested parties, if any, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6.With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-II) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Managing Director, 34/123, 6th Floor, Dugar Tower, Marshal Road, Egmore, Chennai.

2.The District Collector,

3.The Special Tahsildar/Deputy Manager, +1 cc to Mr.R.G.Shankar Ganesh , Advocate in SR.No. 58974 vsn AE/MR/SAR3/15.06.2017/3P/5C W.P(MD)No.10545 of 2017 07.06.2017