AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 255 wordsM. Jaichandren, J.—Heard Mr. G. Prabhu Rajadurai, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners, as well as Mr. R. Manoharan, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent.
Though the prayer sought for by the Petitioners in the present writ petition is for a larger relief, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner had submitted that it would suffice, if the representation of the Petitioner, dated 28.06.2010, is directed to be disposed of, on merits, within a specified period.
The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent, has no objection for such an order being passed by this Court.
In view of the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of this petition and in view of the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners, the Respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the Petitioners'' representation, dated 28.06.2010, on merits and in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioners, as well as to the other parties concerned, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Petitioners are directed to submit a copy of the representation, dated 28.06.2010, along with a copy of this order, to the Respondent. However, it is made clear, that this Court, by this order, has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.
The writ petition stands disposed of, with the above directions. No costs.
