Disposed

K.Palanisamy v. The District Backward Class

Madras HC19 Sept 2017WP/24968/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under Article 226, the High Court directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 4.5.2017 and pass orders within eight weeks to dispose of the matter without addressing the merits.

What did the court decide?

The respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 4.5.2017 and pass orders in accordance with law within eight weeks.

K.Palanisamy Vs The District Backward Class — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 19.09.2017

¶4

CORAM

¶5

The Honourable MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

¶6

W.P.No.24968 of 2017
and W.M.P.No.26346 of 2017
K.Palanisamy [ Petitioner ]
Vs
The District Backward Class
Welfare and Minority Welfare Officer
District Collector Office Complex Coimbatore [ Respondent]

¶7

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioners representation dated 4.5.2017 within a time frame. For Petitioner : Ms.R.Renukadevi For Respondents : Mr.S.N.Parthasarathi, GA ORDER

¶8

Mr.S.N.Parthasarathi, learned Government Advocate takes notice for the respondent. By consent, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶9

The petitioner has filed the above writ petition to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to consider and dispose of his representation dated 4.5.2017, within a time frame.

¶10

¶11

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶12

¶13

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the respondent has not passed any order on the petitioner's representation dated 04.05.2017 so far.

¶14

Mr.S.N.Parthasarathi, learned Government Advocate appearing for

¶15

the respondent submitted that the respondent may be directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 04.05.2017, and pass orders in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks.

¶16

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, without expressing any opinion with regard to the merits of the case, I direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 04.05.2017 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, the writ petition is disposed of. No

¶18

costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

19.09.2017

The District Backward Class Welfare and Minority Welfare Officer District Collector Office Complex Coimbatore

¶23

http://www.judis.nic.in

M. DURAISWAMY,J.

W.P.No.24968 of 2017
19.09.2017

¶28

http://www.judis.nic.in

K.Palanisamy v. The District Backward Class

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Palanisamy v. The District Backward Class

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

R.Muthaiyan Vs The Secretary

Kapico Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Vs Mr.Devanand

B.Anandkumar Vs R.Vengatesan

R.Ashok, Vs The District Collector

Parvathi, Vs The District Revenue Officer

M.Kalidoss, S/o.Muthaiah, Vs The District Collector