V. Deivasigamani vs The Commissioner HR and CE Department and Others

M. Jaichandren, J.—Heard Mr. T.V. Ramanujam, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and the learned Counsel

appearing on behalf of the Respondents 1 and 2.

The main contention of the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner is that the impugned order, dated 25.05.2011, had been

passed by the first Respondent, without giving an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner.

The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents 1 and 2 had submitted that the impugned order had been passed pursuant a

direction issued by this Court, by its order, dated 02.03.2011, made in W.P. No. 5043 of 2011. However, the learned Counsel is not in a position

to show that the Petitioner had been given an opportunity of hearing before the impugned order, dated 25.05.2011, had been passed.

In such circumstances, the impugned order of the first Respondent, dated 25.05.2011, is set aside. The first Respondent is permitted to pass an

order, afresh, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner, as well as the Respondents 3 to 5 and after considering their objections, if

any, on merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.

This Writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petition is closed.