N.S. Ramasamy v. The District Collector,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 02.02.2017 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH W.P.(MD)No.4652 of 2013 N.S.Ramasamy ... Petitioner vs.
1.The District Collector, Collectorate, Dindigul District, Dindigul.
2.The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayats), Ottanchathiram Panchayat Union, Ottanchathiram Post, Dindigul District.
3.The President, Ambiligai Village Panchayat, Ottanchathiram Panchayat Union, Ottanchathiram Post, Dindigul District.
4.Lakshmi Block Development Officer (Small Saving), O/o.P.A.To Collector Small Savings, Collectorate, Dindigul, Dindigul District.
... Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, direct the 1st respondent to take appropriate disciplinary action against the 4th respondent by imposing penalty for giving false information in respect of council meeting held on 22.03.2013 in Ambiligai Village Panchayat Ottanchathiram Panchayat Union Dindigul District. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Saravanakumar For Respondents 1-3 : Mr.T.R.Janarthanam Additional Government Pleader For 4th Respondent : No Appearance
ORDER
Though the petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking for mandamus to the first respondent to take disciplinary action against the fourth respondent, the learned counsel for the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
petitioner submits that he would be satisfied if a direction is given to the first respondent to consider his representation on its own merits.
2.The petitioner's grievance is that the fourth respondent had given some false information to the authorities. This Court while exercising its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot go into the factual aspects as to whether the information given by the fourth respondent is false or not. Nevertheless, since the petitioner's representation dated 28.12.2011 has not been considered till date, it would be appropriate to direct the first respondent to consider the same on its own merits. 3.In view of the same, there shall be a direction to the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 28.12.2011 on its own merits and pass orders, in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any views with regard to the complaint made by the petitioner.
4.With the above observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.
Sd/ Assistant Registrar(CS-I) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar.
To 1.The District Collector, Collectorate, Dindigul District, Dindigul.
2.The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayats), Ottanchathiram Panchayat Union, Ottanchathiram Post, Dindigul District.
3.The President, Ambiligai Village Panchayat, Ottanchathiram Panchayat Union, Ottanchathiram Post, Dindigul District.
+1CC to M/S.M.Saravana Kumar, Advocate, SR.No. 5748 +1CC to the Special Government Pleader, SR.No. 5983 W.P.(MD)No.4652 of 2013 02.02.2017 sms AM/MR/17.02.2017/2P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/