Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

M.RAMAIAH versus JOINT REGISTRAR

High Court of Madras

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


M.Ramaiah v. Joint Registrar - WP.No.2597 of 2006 [2007] RD-TN 695 (26 February 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26.2.2007

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN

W.P.No.2597 of 2006

M.Ramaiah .. Petitioner

vs.

1. The Joint Registrar of Co-op Societies,

Cuddalore Region,

Cuddalore.

2. The Deputy Registrar of Co-op Societies,

Cuddalore Circle,

Cuddalore. .. Respondents The writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as stated therein.

For petitioner : Mr.C.Prakasam

For respondents : Ms.C.K.Vishnupriya Government Advocate

O R D E R



The writ petition has been filed praying for a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to consider and pass orders on the written representation made by the petitioner, on 27.8.2005.

2. It is stated that the writ petitioner is a Ceylon Repatriate. He was appointed, in the year 1981 as a Junior Assistant in the Co-operative Department and he had joined duty in the office of the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, as a Temporary Employee, on 22.9.1981. In the service Registrar his date of birth had been mentioned as 16.7.1947 instead of his actual date of birth, which is said to be, 20.9.1950. Even though the petitioner had made several representations not to pass orders retiring him from service, since his actual date of birth is said to be, 20.9.1950, the respondents had passed orders, on 29.7.2005, according to which he was allowed to retire from service, on 31.7.2005. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that since the writ petition itself is for a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to dispose of the representation of the petitioner, dated 27.8.2005, the second respondent may be directed to dispose of the same, on merits and in accordance with law.

4. Considering the nature of the relief sought for in the writ petition, without going into the merits of the case, I direct the second respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 27.8.2005, and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected W.P.M.P.No.17428 of 2006 is closed.

lan

To

1. The Joint Registrar of Co-op Societies,

Cuddalore Region,

Cuddalore.

2. The Deputy Registrar of Co-op Societies,

Cuddalore Circle,

Cuddalore.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.