Disposed

S.Sampath v. the Director General of Police

Madras HC23 Jul 2015WP(MD)/12735/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order disposed of a writ petition seeking a mandate to send the petitioner to training for a Grade II Police Constable post. The court directed the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation on merits within two months and disposed of the writ petition with no costs.

What did the court decide?

Granted two months to the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation on merits and pass appropriate orders.

S.Sampath Vs the Director General of Police — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 23.07.2015

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.12735 of 2015 and

¶7

M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2015

S.Sampath

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu Uniform Recruitment Board, Chennai.

¶12

2.The Superintendent of Police, Karur District, Karur. ... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to send the petitioner to training for the post of Grade II Police Constable according to the result published in the year 2012.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Gokul Raj

¶15

For Respondents : Mr.S.Kumar, AGP

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

The petitioner seeks for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents send the petitioner to training for the post of Grade II Police Constable according to the result published in the year 2012.

¶18

Mr.S.Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

¶19

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it would suffice if the representation of the petitioner is disposed of, on merits and in accordance with law, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶20

4.In view of the limited scope of the prayer, the first respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 09.04.2014 on merits and in accordance with law https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ and pass appropriate orders within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶21

¶22

5.With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P.is closed. Sd/-

¶23

Assistant Registrar (Crl.Side)

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶25

nbj To

¶26

1.The Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu Uniform Recruitment Board, Chennai.

¶27

2.The Superintendent of Police, Karur District. +1Cc to Mr.S.Gokulraj Advocate SR.No.41386 +1Cc to Spl Government Pleader SR.No.41108

¶28

W.P.(MD)No.12735 of 2015 Dated: 23.07.2015

¶29

JAM 07.08.2015 2P/5C

¶30

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

S.Sampath v. the Director General of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Sampath v. the Director General of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B. Subaitha Begum, Vs the Director of Collegiate

S. Mariappan, Vs the District Collector

R.K.Venkatraman Vs the Secretary to Government

R.Rajendran, Vs the Districtg Revenue Officer

R. Gurusamy, Vs the Tamil Nadu Newsprint

S.R. Arul Raja Selvan, Vs Government of India