S.Vairamani, Aee Mechanical v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 28.03.2016
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH W.P.(MD) No.6050 of 2016 S.Vairamani ... Petitioner -vs1.
The State of Tamilnadu rep. by Director General of Police (Vigilance) Tamilnadu Electricity Board, 144 Annasalai, Chennai-600 002.
2.
The Vigilance Officer, Tamilnadu Electricity Board, 144 Annasalai, Chennai-600 002.
3.
The Chief Engineer (Personnel) Tamilnadu Electricity Board, 144 Annasalai, Chennai-600 002.
4.
The Secretary Tamilnadu Electricity Board, 133 Annasalai, Chennai-600 002 ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to consider and dispose the petitioner's representation dated 13.04.2007 and subsequently made the same as 1st remainder on 12.02.2016 to the 1st respondent on merits in accordance with law after providing the opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Krishnamurthy For Respondent : Mr.S.Dhayalan
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed, seeking a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and dispose the petitioner's representation dated 13.04.2007 and subsequently made the same as 1st remainder on 12.02.2016 to the 1st respondent on merits in accordance with law after providing the opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
2.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.
3.
It appears that the petitioner had given a representation dated 12.02.2016 making allegations against his colleagues, namely, Natesan, Muthuramalingam and it is his grievance that no action has been taken on his representation. It is a common knowledge that representation of this https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
nature complaining about colleagues are frequently made and it is not necessary that in every such representation, duty is cast upon the authorities to take action. A Division Bench of this Court in M.Ingasi v. The Commissioner of Devakottai Municipality and others reported in (2010) 2 LW 785 have stated that this Court will be very careful in directing the authorities to "consider and pass orders" as that may cause undue prejudice to the aggrieved persons.
4.
The learned counsel for the Tamilnadu Electricity Board submits that this petitioner is a Petition Monger and it is his habit to keep complaining about all the colleagues.
5.
Without going into those allegations, this Court is of the view that it is not a fit case to pass orders as prayed for, in the light of the law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court as stated above. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(P&A) /True copy/ Sub AssistantRegistrar To 1.
The Director General of Police (Vigilance) Tamilnadu Electricity Board, 144 Annasalai, Chennai-600 002.
2.
The Vigilance Officer, Tamilnadu Electricity Board, 144 Annasalai, Chennai-600 002.
3.
The Chief Engineer (Personnel) Tamilnadu Electricity Board, 144 Annasalai, Chennai-600 002.
4.
The Secretary Tamilnadu Electricity Board, 133 Annasalai, Chennai-600 002.
+1cc to Mr.ADV.R.Krishnamurthy, Advocate SR.NO.17196 sm:AAL-MPA:11.04.2016:2P/6c W.P.(MD)No.6050 of 2016 28.03.2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/