H.C. ordered respondents to dispose of petitioner's pending appeal on merits within three months, ensuring opportunity of hearing affected parties, without expressing opinion on merits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 26.06.2015
Coram
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN
W.P.(MD).No.10620 of 2015
Ganesan
:Petitioner
vs.
1.The Senior Regional Manager, Tamil Nadu state Marketing Corporation (TASMAC) Ltd., Trichy.
2.The District Manager, Tamil Nadu state Marketing Corporation (TASMAC) Ltd., Thanjavur District. : Respondents
Prayer : Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1st respondent to dispose of the appeal, dated 18.05.2015, pending before the 1st respondent filed by the petitioner against the order of the 2nd respondent in Na.Ka.No.8016/RV-2/2014, dated 18.04.2015, on merits and in accordance with law, within a time frame that may be fixed by this Court.
O R D E R
The prayer in the Writ Petition is a Writ of Mandamus, praying to direct the 1st respondent to dispose of the appeal, dated 18.05.2015, filed by the petitioner against the order of the 2nd respondent in Na.Ka.No.8016/RV-2/2014, dated 18.04.2015.
2.Mr.M.Muniyasamy, the learned Standing Counsel takes notice for the respondents and by consent of both parties, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.
3.The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that it would suffice if the appeal of the petitioner is disposed of, on merits and in accordance with law, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
4.In view of the limited scope of the prayer, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue involved, the 1st respondent is directed to dispose of the appeal of the petitioner, dated 18.05.2015, if not already disposed of, and pass appropriate orders on the same and in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. If on a specified date the petitioner does
2
not appear for personal hearing, orders may be passed in accordance with law based on the available records, after recording the absence of the Party/Parties. The persons, who are likely to be affected are also to be heard before any final decision is to be taken.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
/True Copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1.The Senior Regional Manager, Tamil Nadu state Marketing Corporation (TASMAC) Ltd., Trichy.
2.The District Manager, Tamil Nadu state Marketing Corporation (TASMAC) Ltd., Thanjavur District.
+1cc to M/S.P.R.Prithiviraj ,Advocate in SR.No 34404
TS/22.07.2015/2P - 4C
W.P.(MD).No.10620 of 2015
26.06.2015
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court ought to direct the respondents to dispose of the pending appeal on merits within a specified time.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ganesan
The Senior Regional Manager, Tamil Nadu state Marketing Corporation (TASMAC) Ltd., Trichy
The District Manager, Tamil Nadu state Marketing Corporation (TASMAC) Ltd., Thanjavur District
S. Vaidyanathan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
