Madras High CourtWP(MD)/22769/2017disposed of

Santhi, v. The Managing Director,

2017-12-12Honourable Mr Justice R. Mahadevan2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 12.12.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN W.P(MD) No.22769 of 2017 Santhi ... Petitioner vs.

1.The Managing Director, Arasu Cable TV Corporation Ltd., 34/123, 6th floor, Dukar Tower, Marsal Salai, Chennai - 600 008.

2.The Special Tahsildar, Tamil Nadu Cable TV Corporation Ltd., Tirunelveli District.

... Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to consider the application made by the petitioner dated 27.07.2016 for allotment of LCO at Kalingapatti, Thiruvengadam Taluk, Tirunelveli District as per the direction of the 1st respondent dated 06.10.2017. For Petitioner : Mr.B.Prasanna Vinoth For Respondents : Mr.S.Gunasekaran

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed, seeking a direction to the second respondent to consider petitioner's application dated 27.07.2016 for allotment of LCO at Kalingapatti, Thiruvengadam Taluk, Tirunelveli District as per the direction of the first respondent dated 06.10.2017.

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission.

3.The case of the petitioner is that she preferred an application dated 27.07.2016 to the second respondent for allotment of LCO and getting signal from the first respondent and the same was not considered, despite, the first respondent has issued a https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

communication dated 06.10.2017 to the second respondent, directing him to receive all the necessary documents and consider the petitioner's application. Since the application of the petitioner was not considered so far, she has come before this Court by filing the present writ petition.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that if reasonable time is granted to the respondents, the application of the petitioner will be considered and appropriate orders will be passed.

5.In view of the said submission, this Court, without going into the merits of the case, directs the second respondent to consider the application of the petitioner dated 27.07.2016 for allotment of LCO in the light of the proceedings of the first respondent dated 06.10.2017 and pass appropriate 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, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as any of the interested parties.

6.With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CSI) /True Copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar +One cc to Mr.B.Prasanna Vinoth, Advocate, SR.No.92339 mj RL/2C/2P/SKN/RSK/SAR4/26/12/2017 W.P(MD) No.22769 of 2017 12.12.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/