Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 2243 (MAD)

A. Suppian v. Director General of Police, Chennai

2013-06-28

D.HARIPARANTHAMAN

body2013
JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner has been working as Cook under the third respondent. He has been in service from1999 onwards. 2. According to him he is qualified for appointment to the post of Junior Assistant by transfer from Cook. Further, according to him, Record Clerk / Office Assistant / Other Basic Government servants are entitled to be appointed as Junior Assistant by transfer if they possess requisite qualification. The petitioner comes under the other Basic Government servant category. 3. It is the further case of the petitioner that he possesses the requisite qualification for appointment to the post of Junior Assistant. His grievance is that he was not included in the panel, dated 30.1.2013 issued by the first respondent containing the names of Record Clerk / Office Assistant / Other Basic Government Servants for appointment to the post of Junior Assistant by transfer. The panel will be in operation till 29.1.2014. 4. Further case of the petitioner is that some of his juniors are included in the panel while his name was not included. He made a representation, dated 17.6.2013 to the first respondent in this regard. 5. The petitioner relies on a decision of the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court in W.P.(MD)No.2490 of 2013 batch cases, dated 13.2.2013 in this regard. Now, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for a direction to the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 17.6.2013 and consequently appoint him as Junior Assistant, by transfer. 6. However, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied if the first respondent is directed to dispose of his representation, dated 17.6.2013 in the light of the aforesaid judgment in W.P.(MD)No.2490 of 2013 batch cases, dated 13.2.2013, within a stipulated period. 7. In these circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to dispose of the representation, dated 17.6.2013 of the petitioner, in the light of the judgment in W.P.(MD)No.2490 of 2013 batch cases, dated 13.2.2013, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.