1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 28.04.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.VENKATARAMAN W.P.(MD) No.5019 of 2011 T.Vijayaraj .. Petitioner Vs. The Superintendent of Police Kanyakumari District at Nagercoil .. Respondent Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 28.03.2011 and pass orders within stipulated time. For Petitioner : Mr.T.A.Ebenezer For Respondent : Mr.V.Rajasekaran Special Government Pleader O R D E R Mr.V.Rajasekaran, Special Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final hearing. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent. 3. The petitioner has come up with the present writ petition for a mandamus directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 28.03.2011 and pass orders within stipulated time. 4. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as a Data Entry Operator on and from 06.08.2010 in Thiruvattar Police Station and working there without any blemish. While so, he has been added as an accused in Crime No.255 of 2006 of Ethamozhi Police Station. Further, he has been served with a show cause notice by the respondent, since he is involved in a criminal case and he was directed to give an explanation within a period of seven days. The petitioner has also offered an explanation for the said show cause notice on 11.03.2011. However, without considering the said https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 explanation, an order of dismissal was passed by the respondent on 10.03.2011. In the meanwhile, he has approached this Court by filing Crl.O.P.(MD) No.807 of 2011 for quashing the proceedings against him in C.C.No.24 of 2010 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Nagercoil. The said petition was allowed by this Court thereby quashing the proceedings referred to above. 5. The petitioner thereafter approached the respondent to consider his case for reinstatement. However, the said representation was not considered so far and hence, the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition for the relief stated earlier. 6. Considering the limited scope of the matter, without expressing any opinion on the claim made by the petitioner, I direct the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 28.03.2011 on merits and in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Writ Petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (P&A) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To The Superintendent of Police Kanyakumari District at Nagercoil. +1 CC to Special Government Pleader (SR.No.15779) W.P.(MD) No.5019 of 2011 28.04.2011 RR NSV/18.5.11/2P/3C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/