Allowed

K.Sivakumar, S/o.Kandhasamy v. The District Project Director

Madras HC28 Aug 2017WP/22976/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the High Court directed the respondent DRDA to consider the petitioner's representation dated 06.07.2016 regarding registration as a government contractor and pass orders within eight weeks, without adjudicating on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and pass orders within eight weeks.

K.Sivakumar, S/o.Kandhasamy Vs The District Project… — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 28.08.2017

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

¶5

W.P.No.22976 of 2017

¶6

K.Sivakumar .. Petitioner

¶7

¶8

The District Project Director District Rural Development Agency (DRDA), Dharmapuri – 5 Dharmapuri District. ..Respondent

¶9

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider the petitioner representation dated 06.07.2017 and to register his name as a government first class contractor.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Gandhi Kumar For Respondent : Mr.R.Rajeswaran Special Govt. Pleader O R D E R

¶11

Mr.R.Rajeswaran, learned Special Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondent. By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶12

The Petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 06.07.2016 and register his name as a Government first class Contractor.

¶13

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that in spite of the petitioner's representation dated 06.07.2016, the respondent has not passed any order so far to register the petitioner's name as a Government first class Contractor.

¶14

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

¶15

Mr.R.Rajeswaran, learned Special Government Pleader taking notice for the respondent submitted that the respondent may be directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 06.07.2016 and pass orders in accordance with law, within a time frame.

¶16

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, taking into consideration the limited prayer sought for in the writ petition and without expressing any opinion with regard to the merits of the case, I direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 06.07.2016 and pass orders in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶17

With this observation, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Sd/Asst.Registrar (CS II ) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar vsm To The District Project Director District Rural Development Agency (DRDA), Dharmapuri – 5 Dharmapuri District. +1cc to Mr.K.Gandhikumar, Advocate eSr. 61472 +1cc to the Government Pleader sr. 62064 W.P.No.22976 of 2017 VSN(CO) VR(11/09/2017)

¶18

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

K.Sivakumar, S/o.Kandhasamy v. The District Project Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Sivakumar, S/o.Kandhasamy v. The District Project Director

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

Mrs.Vanaroja, Vs The District Collector of

Mrs. Vijaya, Vs The District Collector of

Mrs. Aruna, Vs The District Collector of

R.Rani Suseela, Vs The General Manager

G.Muruvan, Vs The Commissioner of Land

G.Subasri, Vs The Inspector General of