High CourtsSingle Bench(2011) 04 MAD CK 0107

K. Vargeesh vs The District Collector, The Assistant Director of Panchayat Collectorate and The Executive Officer

Madras High Court · Decided on 12 April 2011

HON’BLE JUDGES
D. Hariparanthaman, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (MD) No. 4387 of 2011

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

16 paragraphs · 330 words

D. Hariparanthaman, J.—Mr. K. Balasubramanian, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the Respondents. By mutual

consent of both sides, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal.

2.

The Petitioner has come forward with this Writ Petition for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the third Respondent to consider the

Petitioner''s representation dated 27.05.2010 and refund the Petitioner''s deposit money with interest.

3.

The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner would submit that the Petitioner is a registered contractor under the third Respondent and he

has been doing the works allotted by the third Respondent. He would further submit that the Petitioner is aged about more than 70 years and due

to heart ailment, he cannot do further works. Therefore, the Petitioner requested the third Respondent to return the earnest money deposit and

deposits taken from his payments. But the third Respondent refused to return the deposit money. He would further submit that thereafter the

Petitioner gave a petition to the first Respondent during the grievance day on 10.05.2010, which was forwarded to the office of the second

Respondent. The Petitioner approached the second Respondent, they informed him that they have forwarded the petition to the third Respondent

for taking action. But no action has been taken, he has been driven from pillar to post by the Respondents. He would further submit that

on27.05.2010, he made a representation to the third Respondent to refund the deposit money, but the third Respondent refused to refund the

deposit money. The Writ Petition is to consider the representation by the third Respondent.

4.

Considering the limited scope of prayer sought for by the Petitioner, without going into the merits of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of

with a direction to the third Respondent to consider the Petitioner''s representation, dated 27.05.2010 and pass appropriate orders on merits and

in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.