Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 3920 (MAD)

N. Durairaj v. The District Collector, Perambalur & Another

2010-09-02

M.JAICHANDREN

body2010
Judgment :- Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. 2. By consent of both the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final hearing and disposal. 3. 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 first respondent is directed to dispose of the representation, dated 10.8.2009, on merits and in accordance with law, within a specified period. 4. The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents, has no objection for such an order being passed by this Court. 5. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on either side, the first respondent is directed to dispose of the representation, dated 10.8.2009, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and to the second respondent, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. The petitioner is directed to furnish a copy of the representation, dated 10.8.2009, to the first 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. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed, with the above directions. No costs.