Disposed

S.Geetha v. The District Elementary Educational officer

Madras HC1 Jun 2023WP/13923/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On the unique facts that a representation dated 11.02.2023 seeking revision of a panel for B.T.Assistant (Science) was not considered, the High Court directed the respondent to consider the representation on merits within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 11.02.2023 and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks.

S.Geetha Vs The District Elementary Educational officer — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.13923 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 01.06.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH

¶6

W.P.No.13923 of 2023

S.Geetha

...Petitioner

1.The District Elementary Educational Officer,

¶11

Kancheepuram, Kancheepuram District.

¶12

2.The Block Educational Officer, Uthiramerur Block, Kancheepuram District. ...Respondents

¶13

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 11.02.2023 and take appropriate action to ensure that the panel of B.T.Assistant (Science) as on 01.01.2022 issued by the second respondent is in accordance with the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.26889 of 2016 dated 30.11.2022 and pass appropriate orders thereon within a time limit.

¶14

1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶15

W.P.No.13923 of 2023 For Petitioner : Mr.P.Rajendran For Respondents : Mr.S.Rajesh, Government Advocate

¶16

ORDER

¶17

With the consent of both the parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶18

The petitioner herein had given a representation to the first respondent on 11.02.2023 seeking for revision of panel to the post of B.T.Assistant (Science), in accordance with the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.26889 of 2016 dated 30.11.2022. Since the said representation was not considered, the petitioner has preferred the present Writ Petition.

¶19

It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon him to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. As such,

¶20

non-consideration of the representation by the Statutory Authority would

¶21

2/4

¶22

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶23

W.P.No.13923 of 2023

¶24

amount to dereliction of duty and hence, this Court will be justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India and direct them to consider the same within a stipulated time.

¶25

In the light of the above observations, there shall be a direction

¶26

to the first respondent herein to consider the petitioner's representation dated 11.02.2023, on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving due notice to all the persons who may be affected in view of the final order to be passed therein, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any of its views with regard to the merits of the claim made by the petitioner and that it is open to the concerned respondent to consider the same on its own merits.

¶27

5. With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶28

No costs.

¶29

01.06.2023

¶30

Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order hvk

¶31

3/4

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.13923 of 2023

M.S.RAMESH,J.

hvk

1.The District Elementary Educational Officer,

¶38

Kancheepuram, Kancheepuram District.

¶39

2.The Block Educational Officer, Uthiramerur Block, Kancheepuram District.

¶40

W.P.No.13923 of 2023

¶41

01.06.2023

¶42

4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

S.Geetha v. The District Elementary Educational officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Geetha v. The District Elementary Educational officer

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

Nithyanandham Ramachandran Vs The Deputy General Manager (Insolvency Professionals)

Nadarajan Vs The District collector

Jayabal Vs State of Tamil Nadu

N.Arun Vs Deputy secretary to Government

S.N.Deepa Vs state of tamilnadu

M.Karthikeyan Vs The District Collector