BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18/12/2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.RAJASURIA W.P(MD)No.11685 of 2008 S.Janarthanan . . . Petitioner Vs. 1.The Principal Secretary, Public Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. 2.The District Collector, Kanyakumari District. . . . Respondents PRAYER Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of mandamus, to direct the first Respondent to consider the representation of the Petitioner dated 07.11.2008 to take action against the culprits on the basis of the recommendation made by the second Respondent vide letter in Mu.A.No.11 of 2008 dated 21.04.2008. !For Petitioner ... Mr.C.Rajakumar ^For Respondents... Mr.R.Janakiramulu Special Govt. Pleader :ORDER
This writ petition has been filed to direct the first Respondent to
consider the representation of the Petitioner dated 07.11.2008 and take action
against the culprits on the basis of the recommendation made by the second
Respondent vide letter dated 21.04.2008 in Mu.A.No.11 of 2008.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also
Mr.R.Janakiramulu, learned Special Government Pleader, who took notice on behalf
of the respondents.
3. The grievance of the petitioner as aired by the learned counsel for the
petitioner placing reliance on the averments in the affidavit accompanying the
writ petition, is to the effect that the petitioner at present is a retired
Deputy Collector, who lodged a complaint as against several persons including a
Minister of the State Government; it appears his complaint to the second
respondent viz., the District Collector, Kanyakumari District evoked response
from the second respondent by way of submitting a report to the first respondent
viz., the Principal Secretary, Public Department, Chennai; now the present writ
petition is for the purpose of directing the second respondent to take further
action on the report submitted by the second respondent.
4. The learned Special Government Pleader would submit that the first
respondent cannot take action against a Minister of the State Government.
5. No doubt, a Secretary to the Government himself cannot take action
against a Minister. But, here the grievance of the petitioner is that the first
respondent shall take further steps based on the second respondent’s report.
6. Without in any way deciding as to the merit of the grievance of the
petitioner, I would like to pass the following direction:
On receipt of a copy of this order, the petitioner shall appear before the
first respondent viz.,the Principal Secretary, Public Department, Chennai,
within a week and air his grievacne and thereupon as per law, the first
respondent shall consider the report submitted by the second respondent viz.,
the District Collector, Kanyakumari District and whatever decision R1 takes, let
him communicate it to the petitioner within a period of one month thereafter.
7. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
smn/ns
To
1.The Principal Secretary,
Public Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai-600 009.
2.The District Collector,
Kanyakumari District.
Nagarcoil.