Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 365 (MAD)

K. v. Muthu VS Secretary, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department

2013-01-17

M.JAICHANDREN

body2013
JUDGMENT 1. Even though, the prayer in the writ petition is for a larger relief, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that it would suffice if the petitioner is permitted to make a detailed representation, relating to the issues arising for consideration of this Court, in the present Writ Petition, before the District Collector, Madurai, who may be directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has no objection for this Court for passing such an order. 2. In view of the above, the petitioner is directed to make a detailed representation, relating to the relief prayed by the petitioner, in the present Writ Petition, before the District Collector, Madurai, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such representation, the District Collector, Madurai, the third respondent herein, shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of 12 weeks thereafter, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the other parties, if any. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.