Disposed

G.Natesan v. District collector

Madras HC22 Feb 2023WP/4755/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed a writ petition by directing respondents to consider the petitioner's pending representation on its merits within four weeks. The Court reserved judgment on the merits of the claim relating to payment of monthly remuneration via PFMS.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 27.10.2022 on merits within four weeks.

G.Natesan Vs District collector — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.Nos.4755 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 22.02.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH

¶6

W.P.No.4755 of 2023

G.Natesan

...Petitioner

1.The District Collector, District Rural Development Agency Head, Villupuram District.

¶11

2.The Project Director, District Rural Development Agency, Villupuram District.

¶12

3.The Block Development Officer, Vallam Panchayat Union, Villupuram District.

¶13

4.M/s.Data Craft e-solutions,

¶14

No.13, Raja Gopal Complex, Opposite to Collector Office,

¶15

Salamedu, Villupuram – 605 602. ...Respondents

¶16

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second and third respondents to adhere to the direction of the first respondent issued vide Na.Ka.No.Aa1/2322/2011/T.P.E dated 28.10.2021 and credit the monthly

¶17

1/4

¶18

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

¶19

W.P.Nos.4755 of 2023

¶20

remuneration payable to the petitioner from PFMS directly to the bank account of the petitioner.

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.U.Karunakaran

¶22

For Respondents For RR1 to 3 : M/s.E.Indumathi Government Advocate

¶23

ORDER

¶24

With the consent of both parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶25

The petitioner herein had given a representation to the

¶26

respondents on 27.10.2022, seeking compliance of the direction given in Na.Ka.No.Aa1/2322/2011/T.P.E. Since the said representation was not considered, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶27

It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this

¶28

nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon the respondents 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

¶29

2/4

¶30

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

¶31

W.P.Nos.4755 of 2023

¶32

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.

¶33

In the light of the above observations, there shall be a direction to the respondents concerned to consider the petitioner's representation dated 27.10.2022 on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of four 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 respondents to consider the same on its own merits.

¶34

5. With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶35

22.02.2023 (1/4)

¶36

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

¶37

3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.Nos.4755 of 2023

M.S.RAMESH,J.

ata

1.The District Collector, District Rural Development Agency Head, Villupuram District.

¶42

2.The Project Director, District Rural Development Agency, Villupuram District.

¶43

3.The Block Development Officer, Vallam Panchayat Union, Villupuram District.

¶44

W.P.No.4755 of 2023

¶45

22.02.2023 (1/4)

¶46

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

G.Natesan v. District collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Natesan v. District collector

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

Dhana Mary.P Vs The Chief Educational Officer

M.Sekhar Reddy Vs Union of India

R.Selvan Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

E.Tholkappian Vs District Collector

K.Neelamegam Vs The Joint Registrar of co-operative societies

V.Kuppusamy Vs The Senior Regional Manager