P. Palanisamy, v. The Distric Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :05.07.2018
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH W.P.(MD)No.5181 of 2016 P.Palanisamy : Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Collector (Development), Madurai District, Madurai.
2.The Project Officer/Addl. Collector, District Rural Development Agency, Madurai District, Madurai.
3.The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayat), Vadipatti Panchayat Union, Madurai District.
4.The President, Thiruvazhavaayanallur Village Panchayat, Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District.
:Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first respondent to accord administrative sanction to the work of constructing thrashing floor at Thiruvazhavaayanallur Village done by the petitioner and to consequently direct the respondents to disburse the payment for that work within a stipulated time fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner :
Mr.R.Devaraj For Respondents :
Mr.J.Gunaseelanmuthiah Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
Heard Mr.R.Devaraj, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.J.Gunaseelanmuthiah, learned Additional Government Pleader who takes notice on behalf of 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, to accord administrative sanction to the work of constructing thrashing floor at Thiruvazhavaayanallur Village done by the petitioner, has not been considered by the first respondent till date and therefore, has filed the present writ petition. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
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 other. Non consideration of the same would amount to dereliction of their ordinary duties of their office and as such this Court would be justified in invoking its powers 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 22.02.2016, in the light of the recommendation of the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.1000/2014/o5, dated 18.12.2015 and the recommendation of the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.757/2015/jp3, dated 13.01.2016, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6.With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(T&P) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The District Collector (Development), Madurai District, Madurai.
2.The Project Officer/Addl. Collector, District Rural Development Agency, Madurai District, Madurai.
3.The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayat), Vadipatti Panchayat Union, Madurai District.
4.The President, Thiruvazhavaayanallur Village Panchayat, Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District.
+1cc to Mr.R.Devaraj, Advocate, SR.No.71494.
W.P.(MD)No.5181 of 2016 05.07.2018 rmk https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ RAM/PN/SAR 4/18.07.2018/2P/6C