Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

P.S.KUMARESAN versus DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

High Court of Madras

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


P.S.Kumaresan v. Director General of Police - W.P. No.9816 of 2005 [2007] RD-TN 698 (26 February 2007)

In the High Court of Judicature of Madras

DATED: 26.02.2007

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN

W.P. No.9816 of 2005

P.S.Kumaresan ..Petitioner Vs

1. The Director General of Police,

Mylapore

Chennai 600 004.

2. The Chairman

Tamilnadu Uniformed Service Recruitment Board No.807

Anna Salai

Chennai 2. ..Respondents The writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as stated therein. For petitioner : Mr.L.Chandrakumar 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 pass orders on the representation, dated 31.10.2000 and the reminder representation, dated 3.3.2005, on merits and as per Rules.

2. It is submitted that the writ petitioner was enlisted as Grade-II Constable, on 9.6.1993. Subsequently, he was promoted as Grade-I Constable, with effect from 28.10.2004, in which post he continues till date.

3. The claim of the petitioner is that he has to be included in the promotion list for appointment in the 20 quota intended for service candidates. Insipte of several representations, the respondents have not taken steps to consider the request of the petitioner by disposing of the representations. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that even though the representations have been addressed to the second respondent, copies of the same have been marked to the first respondent. Hence, the first respondent may be directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner, dated 31.10.2000 and the reminder representation, dated 3.3.2005, on merits and in accordance with law.

5. Considering the nature of the relief sought for in the writ petition, without going into the merits of the case, I direct the petitioner to submit a copy of the representation, dated 31.10.2000 and the reminder representation, dated 3.3.2005, along with a copy of this order. On receipt of such representations, the first respondent is further directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 31.10.2000 and the reminder representation, dated 3.3.2005, 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.

7. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected W.P.M.P.No.18702 of 2006 is closed. lan

To

1. The Director General of Police,

Mylapore

Chennai 600 004.

2. The Chairman

Tamilnadu Uniformed Service Recruitment Board No.807

Anna Salai

Chennai 2

[PRV/9683]


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.