Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 1692 (MAD)

Mrs. G. Nagammal v. The Block Development Officer Marakkanam Panchayat Union Marakkanam & Others

2008-06-11

M.JAICHANDREN

body2008
Judgment :- By consent of the learned counsels on either side, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal. 2. Heard the learned counsels appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. 3. Though the prayer 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 4. 1995, is directed to be disposed of by the second respondent, within a specified period. 4. The learned Government Advocate has no objection for this Court passing such an order. 5. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned, without going into the merits of the case, the second respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner, dated 4. 1995, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if it has not been disposed of till date. The petitioner is directed to furnish a copy of the representation, dated 4. 1995, to the second respondent, along with a copy of this order. However, It is made clear that while considering the representation of the petitioner, dated 4. 1995, for appointing him in any prevailing vacancy of Sweeper in the Marakkanam Panchayat Union Elementary School, the appointment of the fourth respondent as a Sweeper would not be disturbed. 6. With the above directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.