Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 2492 (MAD)

M. P. Narayanan v. Joint Director/Project Director

2013-07-16

M.JAICHANDREN

body2013
ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well as the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that it would suffice, if the second respondent is directed to consider the explanation submitted by the petitioner, dated 16.11.2012, and pass appropriate orders thereon, within a specified period. 3. The learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents have 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, the second respondent is directed to dispose of the explanation submitted by the petitioner, dated 16.11.2012, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.