Disposed

Thiruselvam v. The Inspector General of

Madras HC4 Oct 2016WP/35203/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court issued a Writ of Mandamus directing the Inspector General of Registration to dispose of the petitioner's representation regarding a date of birth discrepancy in the service register within six weeks, without adjudicating the merits of the claim.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 1st respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation on merits within six weeks.

Thiruselvam Vs The Inspector General of — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 04.10.2016

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH

¶6

Writ Petition No.35203 of 2016

Thiruselvam

... Petitioner

vs.

The Inspector General of Registration, Mylapore, Chennai-28.

¶11

The District Registrar, Thanjavur. ... Respondents

¶12

Writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 04.08.2016 forwarded by the 2nd respondent in Proceedings Na.Ka.No.2430/A1/2016 dated 05.08.2016 within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Lakshmi Narayanan for M/s.B.Vijay For Respondents : Mr.S.N.Parthasarathi

¶14

ORDER

¶15

¶16

The Writ Petition has been filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 04.08.2016 forwarded by the 2nd respondent in Proceedings Na.Ka.No.2430/A1/2016 dated 05.08.2016 within a time stipulated by this Court.

¶17

The case of the petitioner is that he has been appointed as Typist in the Registration Department on 25.07.1986 by direct recruitment through the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission. Thereafter, he was promoted as Assistant on 21.01.1992 and subsequently, as Sub-Registrar on 06.11.1996.

¶18

The further case of the petitioner is that his date of birth was registered under Section 12 of the Registration of Birth and Death Act, 1969 read with Rule 8 of the Tamil Nadu Registration of Birth and Death Rules, 2000 with the Thanjavur Municipal Corporation as 19.07.1960 at Government Raja Mirasudhar Hospital, Anna Salai, Thanjavur District and a Certificate to that effect has also been issued to him bearing Registration No.107/1960/04/02301. But, unfortunately, his date of birth was wrongly entered as 04.03.1959 in the school records by the School Authorities, while admitting him in

¶19

¶20

the school.

¶21

It is also the case of the petitioner that after completing the post graduate degree in the year 2001 at Annamalai University, the petitioner joined the service on 25.07.1986 as typist in the Registration Department and his date of birth was wrongly mentioned as 04.03.1959 in the Service Register based upon his school records. In this regard, the petitioner made a representation to the 1st respondent through proper channel on 05.08.2016, namely, the 2nd respondent for alteration of his date of birth and the same was forwarded by the 2nd respondent. But, no action is taken on the same so far. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court with this Writ Petition.

¶22

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate who takes notice on behalf of the respondents.

¶23

Considering the facts and circumstance of the matter and also considering the limited prayer made in the Writ Petition, without going into the merits of the claim of the petitioner, this Court directs

R.SUBBIAH, J

ts i

the 1st respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 04.08.2016 forwarded by the 2nd respondent in Proceedings Na.Ka.No.2430/A1/2016 dated 05.08.2016, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to the merits of the claim of the petitioner and it is for the 1st respondent to consider the same strictly on merits and in accordance with law.

¶28

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

04.10.2016

Index:Yes/No tsi

The Inspector General of Registration, Mylapore, Chennai-28.

¶33

The District Registrar, Thanjavur.

¶34

W.P.No.35203 of 2016

¶35

¶36

DATED: 04.10.2016

Thiruselvam v. The Inspector General of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thiruselvam v. The Inspector General of

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

A.Savarimuthu, S/o.Arulandu Vs Government of Tamil Nadu

K.Manickam, Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

M. Premavathy, Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

R.Ponnusamy Vs Government of Tamil Nadu

A.Manoharan Vs State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by

R.Amutha, Vs The Director General of Police