Deivendran. A v. Tamil Nadu Forest Plantation Corporation Ltd (Tafcorn),

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 20.02.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SHAMIM AHMED and W.M.P.(MD)No.19224 of 2022 A.Deivendran ... Petitioner vs.

Tamil Nadu Forest Plantation Corporation Limited, (TAFCORN), represented by its Managing Director, Karur Road, Mallachipuram, Kambarasampettai, Trichy - 620 101.

... Respondent PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent to regularly promote the petitioner herein as Forest Range Officer with effect from the date of his initial date of temporary promotion ie., 30.08.2017 and to grant him all consequential benefits.

For Petitioner :Mr.Aayiram K.Selvakumar For Respondent :Mr.R.Venkatesan for Dr.T.Srinivasan *****

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to direct the respondent to regularly promote the petitioner herein as Forest Range Officer with effect from the date of his initial date of temporary 1/5

promotion ie., 30.08.2017 and to grant him all consequential benefits. 1.

The facts of the case in a nut shell, led to filing of this Writ Petition and necessary for disposal of the same, are as follows:- (a) The petitioner was appointed as Forester in the respondent Corporation on 21.09.2009 and was regularised on 20.09.2011 in the said post. He was also promoted to the post of Forest Range Officer temporarily on 30.08.2017 and 31.10.2019. It is the case of the petitioner that though there is no impediment to regularly promote the petitioner with effect from his initial appointment, he was kept under temporary promotion. It is the further case of the petitioner that as the petitioner was promoted in the post of Forest Range Officer on a temporary basis, it is his apprehension that he may be reverted back to the feeder category. In this regard, the petitioner had made several representations to the respondent. However, till date the same has not been considered by the respondent. In such circumstances, this Writ Petition has been filed seeking the relief as stated above. 2.

Heard Mr.Aayiram K.Selvakumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R.Venkatesan, learned Standing Counsel for for the respondent 2/5

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner, while reiterating the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of this Writ Petition, submits that the petitioner has made several representations to decide the grievances and claim of the petitioner before the respondent, however, till date, no action was taken and the respondent has not decided the representation. Thus, he submitted that a positive direction may be given to the respondent to consider the representation and decide the same by way of a reasoned and speaking order on merits and in accordance with law within a time frame that may be stipulated by this Court.

4.

Mr.R.Venkatesan, learned Standing Counsel for for the respondent submits that the petitioner is not entitled for the relief claimed in the Writ Petition. However, if the petitioner is aggrieved by any action of the respondent, he may file a fresh representation before the respondent, the same shall be considered by way of a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law.

5.

The request of the learned Sanding Counsel for the respondent appears to be genuine and justified. Accordingly, after considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for both parties and perusing the records and averments made in the Writ Petition, this Court deems it 3/5

appropriate that no useful purpose will be served in keeping this Writ Petition pending before this Court.

6.

Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to file a fresh representation before the respondent detailing his claim and grievances within a period of four weeks from today. If any such representation is filed by the petitioner before the respondent within the time stipulated by this Court, the respondent is directed to consider the same and pass a reasoned and speaking order on merits and in accordance with law, after giving sufficient opportunity to the petitioner, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of such representation. The respondent shall communicate the order to the petitioner through Registered Post with Acknowledgement Due (RPAD) within a period of two weeks from the date of passing the order.

7.

With the above directions, this Writ Petition is finally disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Index :Yes / No 20.02.2025 Internet :Yes / No NCC :Yes / No cmr 4/5

SHAMIM AHMED, J.

cmr 20.02.2025 5/5