S.Navaneetha Krishnan, v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.12.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN W.P(MD) No.23274 of 2017 S.Navaneetha Krishnan ... Petitioner vs.

1.The District Collector, Madurai, Madurai District.

2.The Special Tahsildar, Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable TV Corporation, Collectorate Buildings, Madurai.

... Respondents PRAYER:Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 20.11.2017 and consequently take appropriate action and pass necessary orders within a time frame fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.J.Jeyakumaran For Respondents : Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed, seeking a direction to the respondents to take appropriate action against one K.S.Jahangir Khan, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 20.11.2017.

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the Additional Government Pleader 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 he is running cable TV business in the name of his wife after getting licence from the first respondent and the licence was also periodically renewed as on https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ date. While so, one K.S.Jahangier Khan, started to collect monthly

subscription illegally from the petitioner's customers, stating that he purchased the licence. Hence, the petitioner has given a representation dated 20.11.2017 to the first respondent to take appropriate action against the said K.S.Jahangier Khan. Since no action has been taken by the respondents so far, the petitioner is before this Court by filing the present writ petition. 4.The learned counsel Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that if a reasonable time is granted to the respondents, the representation 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 representation of the petitioner dated 20.11.2017 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of eight 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 (CS-III) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The District Collector, Madurai, Madurai District.

2.The Special Tahsildar, Tamil Nadu Arasu Cable TV Corporation, Collectorate Buildings, Madurai.

+1cc to M/S.J.JEYAKUMARAN, Advocate SR.No.93883. W.P(MD)No.23274 of 2017 19.12.2017 mj SDS/SKN:RSK/SAR 2/04.01.2018/2P/4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/