Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 649 (MAD)

Poongavanam v. Tamil Nadu State Human Rights Commission Rep by its Chairman, Chennai & Others

2010-02-17

M.JAICHANDREN

body2010
Judgment :- Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. Though the prayer sought for by the petitioners, in the present writ petition, is for a larger relief, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that it would suffice, if the representation of the petitioner, dated 20.10.2009, which had been forwarded by the second respondent to the third respondent, is directed to be disposed of by the third respondent, on merits, within a specified period. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, has no objection for such an order being passed by this Court. 4. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on either side, without going into the merits of case, the third respondent is directed to dispose of the representation, dated 20.10.2009, which is said to have been forwarded by the second respondent to the third respondent, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioners are directed to furnish to the respondent a copy of the representation, dated 20.10.2009, along with a copy of this order. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P is closed.