Madras High CourtWP(MD)/19265/2016disposed of

J.Ajith Aravind v. The Chief Engineer (Personnel)

2021-02-26Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani2 pages

W.P.(MD)No.19265 of 2016 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:26.02.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P.(MD)No.19265 of 2016 J.Ajith Aravind ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Chief Engineer (Personnel), TANGEDCO, Administrative Branch, Chennai.

2.The Superintendent Engineer, General Distribution Circle, TANGEDCO, Madurai.

... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 13.10.2015 and appoint the petitioner in a suitable post.

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Anand Kumar For Respondents : Mr.T.Sakthi Kumaran Standing counsel

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 13.10.2015 and appoint the petitioner in a suitable post.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner's father died in harness, while he was in service, on 19.03.2011. Thereafter, the petitioner has made a representation for compassionate appointment on 19.06.2012, at the age of 13 years. However, there is no progress for the representation. Hence, the petitioner has made a representation on 13.10.2015, to the second respondent, after attaining majority. Even thereafter, the representation was not disposed of. Therefore, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition with the aforesaid prayer.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that this Court may issue a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation of the petitioner, dated 13.10.2015, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1/2

W.P.(MD)No.19265 of 2016 on merits and in accordance with law, within a specified period.

4. The learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that the petitioner's earlier application dated 19.06.2012 was considered and the same was rejected on 27.06.2012 and without challenging the said order, the present writ petition has been filed.

5. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that without challenging the order of rejection, filing the present writ petition is not maintainable. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to work out the remedy, in the manner known to law. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (RTI ACT) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) akv To 1.The Chief Engineer (Personnel), TANGEDCO, Administrative Branch, Chennai.

2.The Superintendent Engineer, General Distribution Circle, TANGEDCO, Madurai.

+1 CC to M/s.T.SAKTHI KUMARAN, Advocate ( SR-7613[F] dated 26/02/2021 ) W.P.(MD)No.19265 of 2016 26.02.2021 RK (27.04.2021) 2P 4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2/2