Madras High CourtWP(MD)/7706/2013disposed of

K.Navaneetha Krishnan, v. The Managing Director

2017-11-30Honourable Mr Justice R. Mahadevan2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 30.11.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN W.P(MD)No.7706 of 2013 and M.P(MD).No.1 of 2013 K.Navaneetha Krishnan ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, 493, Anna Saalai, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035.

2. The Executive Engineer and Administrative Officer, Madurai Housing Board Unit, Ellis Nagar, Madurai-625 016.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pass appropriate orders as per the petitioner's representation dated 19.03.2013 on the light of the G.O.MS.No.215 Housing and Urban Development Department, dated 28.09.2012, within a time frame, fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.F.X.Eugene For Respondents : Mr.S.Nagarajan

ORDER

By consent, this writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

2. According to the petitioner, the respondents, by order dated 31.07.1995, had allotted a house in No.A26, in the S.M.T. Scheme at Rajapalayam Housing Unit to him. Being dissatisfied with the interest rates, he had not paid the interest regularly and on the other hand, made several representations. Therefore, the authorities had cancelled the allotment order on 21.06.1996. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Aggrieved over the same, several suits came to be filed, which were also failed to end in his favour. In the meanwhile, the Government has passed G.O.Ms.No.215 (Housing and Urban Development Department) dated 28.09.2012, announcing reduced interest rates for all the allotees of Tamil Nadu Housing Board and it was, at this juncture, the petitioner has submitted a representation dated 19.03.2013, seeking the respondents to consider his claim in line with the G.O.Ms.No.215 dated 28.09.2012. As the same is kept pending, without any action, the present petition came to be filed.

3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted it would suffice, if a direction is issued to the respondents to consider his representation dated 19.03.2013, in the light of G.O.Ms.No.215, within a stipulated time limit.

4. It is seen that the petitioner has submitted his representation in the year 2013 and it is not known, whether such a claim still subsists, due to passage of time.

5. Under such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to consider and pass orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 19.03.2013, if not already passed, on merits and in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity of hearing to all the necessary parties, including the petitioner, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-II) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar + 1 cc TO Mr.S.Nagarajan , Advocate in SR No. 90763 dsk AE/MR KKR/SAR3/21.12.2017/2P/2C ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.7706 of 2013 and M.P(MD).No.1 of 2013 30.11.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/