Allowed

P.Balasubramanian v. The Chairman cum Managing Director

Madras HC21 Feb 2023WP/4147/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court held that non-consideration of a representation by a statutory authority amounts to dereliction of duty. The court directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation for appointment on compassionate grounds within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 22.11.2022 on its merits and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks.

P.Balasubramanian Vs The Chairman cum Managing Director — Madras HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

W.P.No.4147 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 21.02.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH

¶6

W.P.No.4147 of 2023

P.Balasubramanian

...Petitioner

The Chairman cum Managing Director, NLC India Ltd., Corporate Office, Block-1, Neyveli, Pincode – 607 801.

¶11

...Respondent

¶12

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 22.11.2022 to appoint the petitioner in the respondent office on the basis of compassionate grounds.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mrs.S.Sasikala

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Heard Mrs.S.Sasikala, learned counsel for the petitioner. Since an

¶16

order for direction to dispose of the petitioner's representation would not

¶17

1/4

¶18

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

¶19

W.P.No.4147 of 2023

¶20

cause prejudice to the respondent, notice to the respondent is dispensed with.

¶21

The petitioner herein had given a representation to the respondent on 22.11.2022 seeking for a direction to appoint him in the office of the respondent on compassionate grounds. Since the said representation was not considered, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶22

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 the respondent 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, non-consideration of the representation by the Statutory Authority would amount to dereliction of duty and hence, this Court will be justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of Constitution of India and direct them to consider the same within a stipulated time.

¶23

2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

W.P.No.4147 of 2023

¶25

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

¶26

to the respondent herein to consider the petitioner's representation dated 22.11.2022 on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, 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 of the petitioner and that it is open to the respondent to consider the same on its own merits.

¶27

5. With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands ordered. No

¶28

costs.

¶29

21.02.2023

¶30

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

¶31

¶32

The Chairman cum Managing Director, NLC India Ltd., Corporate Office, Block-1, Neyveli, Pincode – 607 801.

¶33

3/4

¶34

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

W.P.No.4147 of 2023

M.S.RAMESH,J.

hvk

W.P.No.4147 of 2023

¶39

21.02.2023

¶40

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

P.Balasubramanian v. The Chairman cum Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Balasubramanian v. The Chairman cum Managing 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

R.Raveendran, Vs The Additional Chief Secretary

V.Kannapurakannan Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

P.Siva, Vs The Superintendent of Police

Dhana Mary.P Vs The Chief Educational Officer

M.Sekhar Reddy Vs Union of India

R.Selvan Vs The State of Tamil Nadu