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
6 paragraphs · 266 wordsM. Jaichandren, J.—Heard Mr. G. Manikanda Raja, the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. K.M. Vijaya Kumar, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the Respondents 1 to 3.
By consent of both the parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal.
At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner had submitted that it would suffice, if the third Respondent is directed to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner, dated 06.09.2010, on merits and in accordance with law, within a specified period.
The learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the Respondents 1 to 3, has no objection for such an order being passed by this Court.
In view of the submissions made by the learned Counsels appearing 3 on either side, the third Respondent is directed to dispose of the representation, dated 06.09.2010, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner, the fourth Respondent and the fifth Respondent, as well as to the other persons concerned, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Petitioner is directed to furnish a copy of the representation, dated 06.09.2010, to the third Respondent, along with a copy of this order. However, it is made clear that this Court, by this order, has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.
This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
